Full text of "Chips from a German workshop Volume 5"

See other formats

. '." "

-
M

===== 0

6 _ 0
u c()

- Ir

..n
ò - c()

_ c()
= ,..=t

- 0

=-
o - - ,..=t
Ë -': ..n

_ ,..=t
z ====
::::>
m

'-"

.. ....
{

'-ò

\
h.

OHIP S

--
f J\i
-- -

FRO:ì\1

........

. .- .,J

A GERMAN WORKSHOP

..
F. l\fAX MULLER 1\1. A.

FOREIGN MEMBER OF THE FRENCH INSTITUTE, ETC.

VOLUME V.

l\IISCELLANEOUS LATER ESSAYS

NE"\V YORK
CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS
1881

[Published b!l arrangement witlt ti,e Autltor]

2G,DS-

RIVERSIDE, CAMBRIDGE:
STEREOTYPED AND PRINTED BY
H. O. HOUGIITON AND COMPANY.

CONTENTS OF FIFTII VOLUME.

P GB

I. ON FREEDO
I (Presidential Address at the l\iidlan<l
Institute, Birmingham, 1879) . . . . . . .. 1
II. THE PHILOSOPHY OF l\IYTHOLOGY (Lecture at the
Royal Institution, 1871) . . . . . . . . . . 53
III. O FALSE ANALOGIES IX COl\IPARATIVE THEOLOGY
(Contemporary Review, 1870). . . . . . . . 98
IV. ON SPELLING (Fortnightly Review. April, 1876.
Printed phonetically) . . . . . . . . . . . 133
V. ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN (1880) 187

ON FREEDO
1:.

PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS DELIVERED BEFORE THE
BIRl\IINGHAM l\UDLAND INSTITUTE,
OCTOBER 20, 1879.

NOT 1110re than twenty years have passed since
John Stuart l\Iill sent forth his plea for Liberty.1
If there is one among the leaders of thought in
England who, by the elevation of his character and
the calm composure of his mind, deserved the so of-
ten n1Ïsplacecl title of Serene Highness, it ,vas, I
think, John Stuart l\lill.
But in his Essay 1.1. On Liberty," 1\lill for once be-
conles passionate. In presenting his Dill of Rights,
in stppping forward as the chall1pion of individual
1 'Mill tells us that his Essay On Libe7.ty was planned and written down
in 1854. It was in mounting the steps of the Capitol in January, 1855,
that the thought first arose of converting it into a volume, and it was not
published till 1859. The author, who in his Autobiography speaks with
exquisite modesty of all his literary performances, al10ws himself one
single exception when speaking of his Essay On Liberty. "None of my
writings," he says, " have been either so carefully composed or so sedu.
lously corrected as this." Its final revision was to have bef'n the work of
the winter of 1858 to 1859, which he and his wife had arranged to pass in
the South of Europe, a hope which was frustrated by his wife's death.
"The Liberty," he writes, "is likely to survive longer than anything
else that I have written (with the possible exception of the Logic), be-
cause the conjunction of her mind with mine has rendered it a kind of
philosophic text-book of a single truth, which the changes progressively
taking place in modern society tend to bring out into strong relief: tho
importance to man and society, of a large variety of character, amI of
giving full freedom to human nature to expand itself in innumerable and
conflicting directions."
YOI.. v. 1

ON FREEDOM.

liberty, he seems to be possessed by a new spirit. He
speaks like a Inartyr, or the defender of n
artyrs.
The individual hunlan soul, with its unfathomable
endown1ents, and its ca pacity of gro,ving to some-
thing ulldrea1nt of in OJr philosophy, becomes in his
eyes a sacred thing, and every encroachment on its
world-wide domain is treated as sacrilege. Society,
the arch-enell1Y of the rights of individuality, is rep-
resented like an evil spirit, ,vhom it behooves every
true man to resist with 1night and main, and whose
demands, as they cannot be altogether ignored, must
be reduced at all hazards to the lowest level.
I doubt \vhether any of the principles for which
Mill pleaded so ,varnlly and strenuously in his Essay
"On Liberty" would at the present day be cllal-
lenged or resisted, even by the most illiberal of phi-
losophers, or tbe most conservative of politicians.
l\1ill's demands sound very humble to our ears. They
a1110unt to no 1110re than this, " that, the individual is
not accountable to society for his actions so far as
they concern the interests of no person but hinlself,
and that he may be subjected to social or legal pnn-
ishments for such actions only as are prejudicial to
the interests of others."
Is there anyone here present ,vho doubts the jus-
tice of that principle, or who would ,vish to reduce
the freedom of the individual to a s111aller 111easure?
\Vhatever social tyranny nlay have existed twenty
years ago, when it \vrung that fiery protest from the
lips of John Stuart 1\iill, can ,ve inlugine a state of
society, not totally Utopian, in which the individual
man need be less ashalned of his social fetters, in
which he. could more freely utter aU his honest con-
victions, roo1'e boldly propound all his theories, 1110r8

ON FREEDO:\I.

fearlessly agitate for their speedy realization; in
which, in fact, each nutn can be so entirely hin1self
as the society of England, such as it no\v is, such as
generations of hard-thinking and hard-working Eng-
lishl11en have nlade it, and left it as the most sacred
inheritance to their sons and daughters?
Look through the whole of history, not excepting
the brightest days of republican freedom at Athens
and ROI11e, and you ,vill not find one single period in
which the measure of liberty accorded to each indi-
vidual ,vas larger than it is at present, at least in
England. And if you ,vish to realize the full bless-
ings of the time in which ,ve live, con1pare l\Iill's plea
for Liberty with another ,vritten not nluch Inore than
t,vo hundred years ago, and by a thinker not inferior
either in power or boldness to l\Iill himself. Accord-
ing to I-Iobbes, the only freedom which an individual
in his ideal state has a right to claim is what he calls
,,' freedolll of thought," and that freedom of thought
consists in our being able to think what we like - so
long .as we keep it to ourselves. Surely, such free-
dom of thought existed even in the days of the In-

quisition, and ,ve should never call thought free, if it
had to be kept a prisoner in solitary and silent con-
finement. By freedom of thought ,ve. mean freedom
of speech, freedonl of the press, freedonl of action,
whether individual or associated, and of that freedom
the present generation, as compared with aU former
generations, the English nation, as compared with all
other nations, enj oys, there can be no doubt, a good
measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and
sometimes running over.
It may be said that some dogmas still remain in
politics, in religion, and in morality; but those ,vho

+
*""

ON FREEDOM.

defend theln claÏtn no longer any infallibility, and
those ,vh9 attack thenl, however slllall their luinority,
need fear no violence, nay, 11lay recko11 on an ilnpar-
tial and even syn1pathetic hearing, as soon as people
discover in their pleadings the true ring of honest
conviction and the wartnth inspired by an unselfish
love of truth.
It has seemed strallge, therefore, to nlany readers
of l\lill, particularly on the Continent, that this plea
for liberty, this deluand for freedoln for every individ-
ual to be what he is, and to develop all the gernls of
his nature, should have come froln ,vhat is known as
the freest of all countries, England. 'Ve luight well
understand such a cry of indignation if it had reached
us from Russia; but why should English philosophers,
of all others, have to protest against the tyranny of
society? It is true, nevertheless, that in countries
governed despotically, the individua
, unless he is
obnoxious to the Governn1ent, enjoys far greater
freedom, or rather license, than in a country like
England, which governs itself. Russian society, for
instance, is extremely indulgent. It tolerates in its
rulers and stateslnen a haughty defiance of the sim-
plest rules of social propriety, and it seems aUJused
rather than astonished or indignant at the vagaries,
the frenzies, and outrages of those who in brilliant
drawing-roonls or lecture-rooms preach the doctrines
of what is called Nihilisnl or Inùividualis1l1, 1 - viz.,
" that society lllust be regenerated by a struggle for
existenoe and the survival of the strongest, processes
which Nature has sanctioned, and which bave proved
1 Herzen defined Nihilism as "the most perfect freedom from aU settled
concepts, from all inherited restraints and impediments which hamper the
progress of the Occidental intellect with the historical drag tied to its
foot.' ,

ON FREEDOM.

successful alllong ,vild animals." If there is danger
in these doctrines the Govenllnent is expected to see
to it. It may place watchnlen at the doors of every
house and at the corner of every street, but it Inust
not count on the better classes cOIning for,vard to
enrol themselves as special constables, or even on the
coöperation of public opinion which in England ,vould
annihilate that kind of Nihilislll ,vith one glance of
scorn and pity. .
In a self-governed country like England, the re-
sistance ,vhich society, if it likes, can oppose to the
individual in the assertion of his rights, is far 1110re
cOlllpact and powerful than in Russia, or even in
Germany. Even where it does not employ the arm
of the law, society kno,vs ho,v to use that quieter,
but more crushing pressure, that caIn), Gorgon-like
look which only the bravest and stoutest hearts know
ho,v to resist.
It is against that indirect repression ,vhich a well-
organized society exercises, both through its 11lale
and fen)ale representatives, that l\lill's denland for
liberty seems directed. He does not stand up for
unlimited individualism; on the contrary, he would
have been the most strenuous defender of that bal-
ance of power between the weak and the strong on
,vbich all social life depends. nut he resents those
slnaller penalties which society will ahvays inflict on
those who disturb its dignified peace and cOll1fort : -
avoidance, exclusion, a cold look, a stinging relnark.
I-Iad 1\Iill any right to cOIn plain of these social penal-
ties? 'V ould it not rather amount to an interference
\vith individual liberty to deprive any individual or
any nUlllber of individuals of those ,veapons of self-
defence? rrhose ,vho thelnselves think and speak

ON FREEDOM.

freely, have hardly a right to conlplain, if others
clailll the same privilege. l\lill hiInself called the
Conservati ve party the stupid party par excellence,
and he took great pains to explain that it was so
not by accident, but by necessity. Need he wonder
if those ,vhom he whipped and scourged used their
own whips and scourges against so Illerciless a critic?
Freethinkers - and I use that nalne as a title of
honor for all who, like l\fill, claim for every indi-
vidual the fullest freeùoln in thought, word, or deed,
compatible with the freedom of others - are apt to
make one mistake. Conscious of their own honest
intentions, they cannot bear to be nlisjudged or
slighted. They expect society to SUbll1Ït to their
often very painful operations as a patient sublnits
to tbe knife of the surgeon. This is not in human
nature. The enemy of abuses is ahvays abused by
his enen1Ìes. Society will never yield one inch with-
out resistance, and fe,v reforlners live long enough
to receive the thanks' of those ,vhonl they have re-
formed. l\Iill's unsolicited election to Parlian1ent
was a triulllph not often shared by social reformers;
it was as exceptional as Bright's adnlission to a seat
in tbe Cabinet, or Stanley's appointIncnt as Deàn of
"\Vesbninster. Such anomalies ,vill happen in a
country fortunately so full of anolnalies as England;
but, as a rule, a political reformer must not be angry
if be passes through life without the title of Right
IIonorable; nor should a man, if he will ahvays
speak the truth, the ,vhole truth, and nothing but
the truth, be disappointed if he dies a martyr rather
than a Bishop.
But even granting that in
iill's till1e there ex-
isted SOlne traces of social tyranny, 'v here are they

ON FREEDOM.

now? Look at the newspapers and the journals.
Is there any theory too wild, any refornl too violent,
to be openly defended? Look at the dra-\ving-rooms
or the Ineetings of learned societies. Are not the
1110st eccentric talkers the spoiled children of the
fashionable \vorld? vVhen young lords begin to
discuss the propriety of lin1Ïtillg the rights of inheri-
tance, and young tutors are not afraid to propose cur-
tailing the long vacation, surely we need not COlll-
plain of the intolerance of English society.
Whenever I state these facts to IllY German and
French and Italian friends, who from reading l\Iill's
Essay "On Liberty" have derived the inlpression
that, however large an alllount of political liberty
England Inay e:ojoy, it enjoys but little of intellectual
freedom, they are generally willing to be converted
so far as London, or other great cities are concerned.
But look at your Universities, they say, the nurseries
of English thought! Con1pare their nlediæval spirit,
their monastic institutions, their scholastic philos-
ophy, with the freshness and freedoln of the Con-
tinental Universities! Strong as these prejudices
about Oxford and C
tlnbridge have long been, they
bave become still more intense since Professor Hehn-
holtz, in an inaugural address \vhich he dE>livered at
his installation as Rector of the U ni versity of Ber-
lin, lent to thelI1 the authority of his great nanlE>.
"The tutors," be says,! "in the English Univer-
sities cannot deviate by a hair's-breadth frolI1 the
dognlatic Systelll of the English Church, without ex-
posing thelI1selves to the censure of their Arch bish-

1 Ueber die Akademische Freiheit del' Deutschen Universitäten, Rede
beim Alltritt des Rectorats an der Friedrich-'Vilhelms-Universität in Ber-
lin, am October 15, 1877, gehalten VOlI Dr. H. Helmholtz.

ON FREEDO:\I.

"".

ops and losing their pupils." In German U ni versi-
ties, on the contrary, we are told that the extrell1e
conclusions of Inaterialistic 111etaphysics, the boldest
speculations ,vi thin the sphere of Dar"will's theory of
evolution, may be propounded without let or hin-
ch.allce, quite as much as the highest apotheosis of
I>apal infallibility.
IIere the facts on ,vhich Professor Helmholtz re-
lies are entirely wrong, and the ,vritings of sonle of
our n10st eluinent tutors supply a more than suffi-
cient refutation of his statements. Archbishops have
no offieial position whatsoever in English U ni versi-
ties, and their censure of an Oxford tutor ,vould be
resented as iInpertinent by the ,vhole University.
Nor does the University, as such, exercise any very
strict control over the tutors, even ,vhen they lecture
not to their o,vn College only. Each l\Iaster of Arts
at Oxford c1ailns no\v the right to lecture (venia
doeendi), and I doubt ,vhether they would sublnit to
those restrictions 'which, in Gernlany, the Faculty
imposes on every Privat-dveent. Privat-ducents in
Gerlnan Universities have been rejected by the
Faculty for incoll1petence, and silenced for insubor-
dination. I know of no such cases at Oxford during
my residence of more than thirty years, nor can I
think it likely that they should ever occur.
As to the extrelne conchu;ions of 1l1aterialistic
Inetaphysics, there are Oxford tutors ,vho have grap-
pled ,vith the systen1s of such giants as IIobbes,
Locke, or IIunH
, and who are not likely to be fright.
ened by B üchner and V ogt.
I kno,v comparisons are odious, and I should be
the last luan to dra,v cOlnparisons between English
and Gel'lnan Universities unfavorable to the latter.

ON FREEDOM.

.."

But with regard to freedonl of thought, of speech,
and action, Professor Helmholtz, if he would spencl
but a few ,veeks at Oxford, ,vould find that ,ve enjoy
it in fuller 11leasure here than the Professors and
Privat-doeents in any Continental University. l'Le
publications of SOlne of our professors and tutors
ought at least to have convinced hinl that if tllere
is less of brave ,vords and turbulent talk in their
\vritings, they display throughout a deterIllination to
speak the truth, which may be lnatched, but could
not easily be excelled, by the leaders of thought in
France, Gernlany, or Italy.
'rhe real difference bet,veen English and Conti-
nental Universities is that the former govern thmn-
selves, the latter are governed. Self-governlnent
entails responsibilities, son1etiInes restraints and reti-
cences. I 111ay here be allo\ved to quote the ,vords
of another elninen t Professor of the U ni versity of
Berlin, Du Bois Reynlond, who, in addressing his
colleagues, ventured to tell them,l "vV e have still to
learn from the English bo\v the greatest inJepeI1-
dence of the individual is conlpatible with willing
subnlission to salutary, though irksonle, statutes."
J;hat is particularly true ,vhen the statutes are self-
im posed. In Gernlany, as Professor Heln1hol tz tells
us hiulself, the last decision in almost all the more
impol
tant affairs of the Universities rests ,vith the
Governnlent, and he does not deny that in times of
political and ecclesiastical tension, a nlost ill-advised
use has been Inacle of that power. There are, be-

1 Ueber eine Akadernie de?' Deutschen Spl.ache, p. 34. Another keen ob-
server of English life, Dr. K. Hillebrand, in an article in the October num-
ber of the Nineteenth Century, remarks: "Nowhere is there greater in-
dividual liberty than in England, and nowhere do people renounce it more
readily of their own accord."

ON FREEDOM.

sides, the less important matters, such as raising of
salaries, leave of absence, scientific l11issions, even
titles and decorations, all of which enable a clever
Minister of Instruction to assert his personal influ-
ence among the less independent melllbers of the
University. In Oxford the University does not kno\v
the l\linistry, nor the Ministry the University. The
acts of the Government, be it Liberal or Conserva-
tive, are freely discussed, and often powerfully re-
sisted by the acaden1ic constituencies, and the per-
sonal dislike of a lVlinister or Ministerial Councillor
could as little injure a professor or tutor as his favor
could add one penn y to his salary.
But these are minor Inatters. \Vhat gives their
own peculiar character to the English Universities is
a sense of power and responsibility: power, because
they are the most respected among the numerous
corporations in the country; responsibility, because
the higher eùucation of the 'whole country has been
committed to their charge. Their only n1aster is
public opinion as represented in Parlian1ent, their
only incentive their own sense of duty. There is no
country in Europe ,vhere Universities hold so ex-
alted a position, and where those who have the honoj
to belong to them may say with greater truth No,,:
blesse oblige.
I know the dangers of self-government, particu-
larly where higher and more ideal interests are con-
cerned, and there are probably few who wish for a
real reform in schools and Universities ,vho have not
occasionally yielded to the desire for a Dictator, of a.
Bismarck or a Falk. But such a desire springs only
from a momentary weakness and despondency; and
no one who knows the difference between being gov-

ON FREEDOM.

erned and governing one's self, ,,"ould ever ,vish to de-
scend from that higher though dangerous position to
a lower one, ho\vever safe and conlfortable it nlight
seem. Noone ,vho has tasted the old ,vine of free-
donI would ever really ,vish to exchange it for the
new ,vine of external rule. Public opinion is sonle-
tinles a hard master, and nutjorities can be great
tyrants to those who want to be honest to their o\vn
convictions. But in the struggle of all against all,
each individual feels that he has his rightful place,
and that he Inay exercise his righ tflll influence. If
he is beaten, he is beaten ill fair fight; if he con-
quers, he has no one else to thank. No doubt, des-
potic Governments have often exercised the most ben-
eficial patronage in encouraging and rewarding poets,
artists, and nlen of science. But men of genius ,vho
have conquered the love and adtniration of a ,vhole
nation are greater than those ,,,ho have gained tbe
favor of the most brilliant Courts; and we know ho\v
SOllie of the fairest reputations have been ,vrecked on
the patronage which they had to accept at the hands
of powerful l\Iinisters or alnbitious Sovereigns.
But to return to Mill and his plea. for Liberty.
Though I can hardly believe that, were he still
among us, he ,vould clainl a larger measure of free-
dom for the individual than is no,v accorded to every
one of us in the society in \vhich ,ve l1love, yet the
chief cause on which he founded his plea for Liberty,
the chief evil which he thought could be remedied
only if society would allow 1110re elbow-roonl to in-
dividual genius, exists in the saIne degree as in his
time - aye, even in a higher degree. The principle
of individuality has suffered nlore at present tha.n
perhaps at any former period of history. rrhe world

ON }"REEDO:\I.

is becoming 1110re and n10re gregarious, and \vhat the
French call our nature 1noutonuière, our tendency to
leap ,,,,here tbe sheep in front of us has lea.pt, be-
conles 11lore and lllore prevalent in politics, in relig-
ion, in art, and even in science. IVL de Tocqueville
expressed his surprise ho\v n1uch lliore Frenchnlen of
the pr
sent day resen1ble one another than diù those
of the last generation. The sallie ren1ark, adds John
Stuart l\lill, Inight be tnade of England in a greater
degree. H The n10dern réginze of public opinion," he
\vrites, " is in an unorganized forn} what the Chinese
educational and political systellis are in an organizetl ;
and unless individuality shall be able successfully to
assert itself against th
s yoke, Europe, notwithstand-
ing its noble antecedents and its professed Christian-
ity, will tend to become another China."
I fu1Jy agree ,vith l\Iill in recognizing the dangers
of unifol'll1ity, but I doubt ,vhetber \vhat he calls the
régime of public opinion is alone, or even chiefly,
ans,verable for it. No doubt there are sOIne people
in whose eyes uniforn1ity seelns an advantage rather
than a disadvantage. If aU were equally strong,
equally educated, equally honest, equally rich, equally
taU, or eql1aUy Slllan, society would Seell1 to them to
have reached the highest ideal. The salne people
a(hnire an old French garden, \vith its c1ipp
d yew-
trees, forn1Ïng artificial ,,,aIls and to,vers and pyra-
mids, far more than the giant yews which, like large
serpents, clasp the soil with their coiling roots, and
overshadow with their dark green branches the 'v hite
chalk cliffs of the Thalnes. But those French gar-
dens, unless they are constantly clipped and pre-
vented froll1 growing, soon fall into decay. As in
nature, so in
o(.i('ty, nnifor111ity Jneans hut too often

ON FREEDOM.

stagnation, ,vhile variety is the surest sign of health
and vigor. The deepest secret of nature is its love of
continued novelty. Its tendency, if unrestrained, is
towards constantly creating ne,v varieties, ,vhich, if
they fulfil their purpose, becollle fixed for a tiIne, or,
it Inay b
, forever; ,vbile others, after they bave ful-
filled their purpose, vanish to 111ake roon1 for new and
stronger types.
The same is the secret of hun1an society. I t con-
sists and lives in individuals, each llleant to be dif-
erent from all the others, and to contribute his own
peculiar share to the comrnon wealth. .,A.s no tree
is like any other tree, and no leaf 011 the saIne tree
like any other leaf, no 11l1l11an being is, or is Ineant
to be, exactly like any other hUIllan being. It is in
this endless, and to us inconceivable, variety of hu-
Inall souls that the deepest purpose of l1tllllan life
is to be realized; and the 1110re society fulfils that
purpose, the 1110re its allows free scope for the devel-
opInent of every individual genu, the richer ,viU be
the harvest in 110 distant future. Such is the lnys-
tery of individuality that I do not ,vonder if even
those philosophers ,vho, like l\lill, confine the use of
the ,vord sacred ,vithin the very sIl1allest cOInpass, see
in each individual soul sornething sacred, SOlllething
to be revered, even \vhere ,ve cannot understand it,
something to be protected against all vulgar violence.
'Vhere I differ from l\Iill and his school is on the
question as to the quarter fronl ,vhence the epidemic
of llnifonnity springs which thrpatens the free devel-
opn1ent of 1110dern society. l\Iill points to the society
in which \ve n10ve; to those ,vho are in front of U
,
to our contelnporaries. I feel convinced that our
real enen1Ïes are at our back, and that the heaviest

ON FREEDO
I.

chains which are fastened on us are those made, not
by the present, but by past generations - by our an-
cestors, not by our contenlporaries.
It is on this point, on the trammels of individual
freedonl ,vith \vhich we may ahnost be said to be
born into the world, and on the Ineans by which we
nlay shake off these old chains, or at all events learn
to carry them more ligbtly and gracefully, that I \vish
to speak to you this evening.
You need not be afraid that I aIn going to enter
upon the llluch discussed subject of heredity, whether
in its physiological or psychological aspects. It is a
favorite subject just no\v, and the l1l0st curious facts
have been brought together of late to illustrate the
,vorking of what is called heredity. But the 11101"e
we IDl0'V of these facts, the less 've seerll able to com-
prehend the underlying principle. Inheritance is one
of those nUll1erOUS ,yords which by their very sinlplic-
ity and clearness are so apt to darken our counsel.
If a father has blue eyes and the son has blue eyes,
'what can be clearer than that he inherited thenl?
If the father stan1nlers and the son stanl111erS, \vho
can doubt but that it canle by inheritance? If the
father is a nlusician and the son a musician, we say
very glibly that the talent ,vas inherited. But what
does inlterited nlean? In no case does it Blean \vhat
inherited usually ll1eans - s0l11ething external, like
nloney, collected by a father, and, after his death, se-
cured by law to his son. \Vhatever f'lse inheritetl
may mean, it does not lllean that. But unfortunately
the word is there, it seems all110st pedantic to chal-
lenge its Ineaning, and people are always grateful if
an easy,yord saves th8ln the trouble of bard thought.
Another apparent advantage of the theory of he-

...

ON FREEDO:\I.

redity is that it never fails. If the son has blue, and
the father black, eyes, aU is right again, for either
the Inother, or the grandmother, or some historic or
prehistoric ancestor, may have had blue eyes, and at-
avisln, ,ve kno\v, will assert itself after hundreds and
thousands of years.
Do not suppose that I deny the broad facts of \vhat
is called by the name of heredity. 'Vhat I deny is
that the name of heredity offers any scientific solution
of a most difficult probleln. It is a name, a meta-
phor, quite as bad as the old metaphor of innate
ideas
. for there is hardly a single point of similar-
ity between t.he process by \vhich a son n1ay share
the black eyes, the stammering, or the musical talent
of his father, and that by which, after his father's
death, the law secures to the son the possession of
the pounds, shillings, and pence which his father
held in the Funds.
But \vhatever the true n1eanillg of heredity may
be, certain it is that every individual COlnes into the
world heavy-laden. Nowhere has the consciousness
of the burden \vhich rests on each generation as it
enters on its journey through life found stronger ex-
pression than among the Buddhists. 'Vhat other
people call by various nalnes, " fate or providence,"
" tradition or inheritance," "circunlstances or envi-
ronn1ent," they call Karntan, deed - what has been
done, whether by ourselves or by others, the aCCUlllU-
lated work of all who have come before us, the conse-
quences of \vhich we have to bear, both for good and
for evi1. OriginaUy this Ka1"'inan seems to have
been conceived as personal, as the ,york ,vhich we
ourselves have done in our former existences. But,
as personally we are not conscious of having done

ON FREEDOM.

such work in forlner ages, that kind of Karman, too,
nlight be said to be ilnpersona1. To the question
how [{"arrnan began, what 'vas the nucleus of that
acculllulatiol1 which fonlls the condition of present
existence, Buddhisln has no answer to give, any more
than any other systen1 of religion or philosophy.
The Buddhists say it began with avidyá, and avidyâ
means ignorance. 1 They are ll1uch nlore deeply in-
terested in the question ho,v Karman lllay be annihi-
la.ted, ho\v each Inan 1nay free hiu1self frolll the influ-
ence of I{arrnan, and Nirvâna, the highest object of
all their dreanls, is often defined by Buddhist philos-
ophers as "freedom frotH Kar.rnan." 2
\Vhat the BudJhists call by the general nan1e of
Karman, cOlnprehends aU influences ,vhich the past
exercises on the present, ,vhether physical or Inental.3
It is not my object to exan1Ìne or even to nalne all
these influences, though I confess nothing is 1110re in-
teresting than to look upon the surface of our lllodern
life as ,ve look on a geological lnap, and to see the
most ancient fOl'lnations cropping out every,vhere
under our feet. Difficult as it is to color a geologi-
cal lnap of England, it would be still nlore difficult
to find a sufficient variety of colors to nutrk the dif-
ferent ingredients of the intellectual condition of her
people.
1"hat aU of us, whether ,ve speak English or Ger-
111an, or French or Russian, are really speaking an
1 Spencer H:1rdy, l1fanual of Buddhism, p. 3D1.
2 Spencer Hardy, 11Ianual of Buddhism, p. 39.
S "As one generation dies and gives way to another, the heir of the con-
sequences of all its virtues and all its vices, the exact result of preëxist-
ent causes, so each individual, in the long chain of life, inherits all, of
good or evil, which all its predecessors have done or been, anù takes up
the struggle towards enlightenment precisely where they left it." Rhys
Davids, Buddhism, p. 104.

ON FREEDO
I.

ancient Oriental tongue, incredible as it \vould have
sounded a hundred years ago, is now recognized by
everybody. Though the various dialects now spoken
in Europe have been separated many thousands of
years from the Sanskrit, the ancient classical lan-
guage of India, yet so close is the bond that holds
the 'Vest and East together, that in lnany cases an
intelligent Englislunan n1ight still guess the 111ean-
iug of a Sanskrit \vord. How little difference is there
between Sanskrit s û n u and English son, between
Sanskrit duhitar and English daughter, bet\veen
Sanskrit vi d, to kno\v, and English to wit, between
Sanskrit vaksh, to gro\v, and English to wax!
Think ho\v \ve value a Saxon urn, or a ROlnan coin,
or a l{eltic \veapon! how we dig for them, clean
them, label then1, and carefully deposit thenl in our
111USeUn1S ! Yet \vhat is their antiquity con1pared
with the antiquity of such \vords as son or daugltter,
father and mother? There are no nl011Ulnen ts older
than those collected in the handy. volumes \vhich \ve
call Dictionaries, and those \"ho kno\v ho,v to inter-
pret those English antiquities - as you lnay see them
interpreted, for instance, in Grill1nl's Dictionary of
the Gerlnan, in Littré's Dictionary of the French, or
in Professor Skeats' Etyn10logical Dictionary of the
English Language - will learn lllore of the real
growth of the human 111ind than by studying Inany
volumes on logic and psychology.
And as by our language \ve belong to the Aryan
stratull1, \ve belong through our letters to the I-Ia-
mitic. "\Ve still write English in hieroglyphics; and
in spite of all the vicissituLles through \vhich the
ancient hieroglyphics have passed in their journey
fro In Egypt to Phænicia, from Phænicia to Greece,
VOL. v. 2

ON FREEDOM.

f1'01l1 Greece to Italy, and fron1 Italy to England,
,vhen we write a capital F 9:, when we dra,v the top
line and the smaller line through the n1Ïddle of the
letter, ,ve really dra 'v the hvo horns of the cerastes,
the horned serpent, ,vhich the ancient Egyptians use
for representing the sound of f. They ,vrite the name
of the king whom the Greeks called Oheops, and they
then1selves Cltuju, like this: 1 -
[;] "" chu
>v- fu

Here the first sign, the sieve, is to be pronounced
chu; the seconù, the horned serpent, fu,. and the Ii t-
tle bird, again, u. In the 1110re cursive or IIieratic
,vriting the horned serpent appears as è'; in the
later De1110tic as y and 'I. The Phænicians, ,vho
borrowed their letters frotn the Hieratic Egyptian,
,vrote
and Lf. The Greeks, ,vho took their letters
from the Phænicians, ,vrote 4, 'Vhen the Greeks,
instead of writing, like the Phænicians, frolll right to
left, began to ,vrite. frOIl1 left to right, they turned
each letter, and as }f becalne K, our k, so =t, vau,
becalne F, the Greek so-called DigalTIll1a, f, the
Latin F.
The first letter in Chuju, too, still exists in our
alphabet, and in the transverse line of our H we may
recognize the last remnant of the lines which divide
the sieve. The sieve appears in I-lieratic as (V, in
Phænician as 8, in ancient Greek as 8, which occurs
on an inscription found at :I\lycenm and else,yhere as
the sign of the spiritus asper, while in Latin it is
known to us as the letter 11. 2 In the same manner

Bunsen, Egypt, ii. pp. 77, 150.
2 lIfémoÏ1.e sm' [' 07.igine Egypfienne de l' Alphabet Phénicien, par E. de
Roug-
, Pari$, 1874.

ON FREEDOM.

tbe undulating line of our capital !f still recalls very
strikingly the bent back of the crouching lion, D
'
,vhich in the later hieroglyphic inscriptions represents
the sound of L.
If thus in our language we are Aryan, in our let-
ters Egyptian, we have only to look at our watches to
see tbat ,ve are Babylonian. \Vhy is our hour divided
into sixty minutes, our n1inute into SL""i(ty seconds?
Would not a division of the hour into ten, or fifty,
or a hundred minutes have been more natural? 'Ve
have sixty divisions on the dials of our watches sinl-
ply because the Greek astronOll1er Hipparchus, ,vho
lived Ül the second century B. c., accepted the Baby-
lonian system of reckoning time, that systelll being
sexagesimal. The Babylonians knew the decimal
system, but for practical purposes they counted by
sossi and sari, the 808808 representing 60, the saros
60 X 60, or 3,600. From Hipparchus that systenl
found its way into the works of Ptolell1Y, about 150
A. D., and thence it was carried down the streanl of
civilization, finding its last resting-place on the dial-
plates of our clocks.
And why are there twenty shillings to our sover-
eign? Again the real reason lies in Babylon. The
Greeks learnt from the Babylonians the art of divid-
ing gold and silver for the pnrpose of trade. It has
been proved that the current gold piece of Western
Asia was exactly the sixtieth part of a Babylonian
'lnnâ, or 1nina. It ,vas nearly equal to our sovereign.
The difficult problem of the relative value of gold
and silver in a bi-metallic currency had been solved
to a certain extent in the ancient .l\Iesopotamian
kingdonl, tbe proportion bet,veen gold and silver be-
ing fixed at 1 to 13!. The silver shekel current in

ON FREEDO
I.

Babylon ,vas heavier than the gold shekel in tbe
proportion of 131 to 10, and had. therefore the value
of one tenth of a gold shekel; and the half silver
shekel, called by the Greeks a drachma, was worth
one twentieth of a gold shekel. The drachma, or
half silver shekel, may therefore be looked upon as
the 1110st ancient type of our own silver shilling in its
relation of one t,ventieth of our gold sovereign.!
I shall Inention only one more of the nlost essen-
tial tools of our mental life - nalnely, our figures,
which ,ve call Arabic, because we received them frolll
the Arabs, but ,vhich the Arabs called Indian, be-
cause they received thel11 fronl the Indians - in order
to sho,v you ho,v this nineteenth century of ours is
under the swa.y of centuries long past and forgotten;
how we are what ,ve are, not by ourselves, but by
those ,vho caIne before us, and ho,v the intellectual
ground on ,vbich ,ve stand is 111ade up of the detritus
of thoughts ,vhich ,vere first thought, not on these
isles nor in Europe, but on the shores of the Oxus,
the Nile, the Euphrates, and the Indus.
Now yon may ,veIl ask, Quorsurn hæc omnia?
"\Vhat has all this to do with fr
edom and ,vith the
free developlnent of individuality? Because a man
is born the heir of all the ages, can it be said that he
is not free to grow and to expand, and to develop all
the faculties of his n1ind? Are those ,vho came be-
fore hil11, and who left hiul this goodly inheritance,
to be called his enen1Ïes? Is that chain of tradition
which connects him ,vith the past really a galling
fetter, and not rather the leading-strings ,vithout
which he ,voulù never learn to ,vall straight?
Let us look at the matter lTIOre closely. Noone
1 See Brandis, Das Jfünzwesen.

ON FREEDOM. (' --

would venture to say that èvery Ï1
c1ividual should
begin life as a young savage, and be left. to fo 111 hiS'
own language, and invent his own letters, ;lUI11erals,
and coins. On the contrary, if we comprehend all
this and a great deal more, such as religion, nlorality,
and secular knowledge, under the general naI:TIe of
education, even the nlost advanced defenders of indi-
vidualislll would bold that no child should enter so-
ciety without submitting, or rather ,vithout being
submitted, to education. l\lost of us would even go
farther, and make it crinlinal for parents or even for
comnlunities to allow children to grow up uneducated.
The excuse of ,vorthless parents that they are at lib-
erty to do with their children as they like, has at last
been blo,vn to the winds, and among the principal
advocates of compulsory education, and of the neces-
sity of curtailing the freedom of savage parents of
savage children, have been Mill and his friends, the
apostles of liberty and individualism.! I remell1ber
the tinle when pseudo-Liberals were not ashamed to
say that, whatever other nations, such as the Ger-
mans, might do, England ,vould never submit to
compulsory educa.tion; but that faint-hearted and
mischievous cry has at last been silenced. A new
era may be said to date in the history of every nation
fronl the day on ,vbich '" compulsory education" be-
comes part of its statute-book; and I nlay congratu-
late the most Liberal town in England on having
proved itself the most inexorable tyrant in carrying
it in to effect.
But do not let us imagine that cOlnpulsory educa-
1 "Is it not almost a seH-evillent axiom, that the State should require
and compel the education, up to a certain standard, of every human being
"ho is born its citizen ? Yet who is there that is not afraill to recognize
and assert this truth? " On Liberty, p. 188.

{

ON FREEDO:\I.

tion is without its dangers. Like a powerful engine,
it lllUSt be carefully watched, if it is not to produce,
what all conlpulsion will produce, a slavish recep-
tivity, and, what all machines do produce, monoto-
nous uniforlnity.
"\Ve kl1o,v that all education Inust in the begin-
ning be purely dognlatic.' Children are taught lan-
guage, religion, nlorality, patriotisn1, and afterwards,
at school, history, literature, nutthematics, and all the
rest, long before they are able to question, to judge,
or choose for thenlsplves, and there is hardly any-
thing that a child ,vill not believe, if it COllles from
those in wllon1 the child believes.
Reading, ,vriting, and al'ithnletic, no doubt, must
be taught dogluatically, and they take up an enor-
nlOUS amount of tiule, particularly in English schools.
English spelling is a national n1Ísfortune, and in the
keen international race among all the countries of
Europe, it handicaps the English child to a degree
that seems incredible till ,ve look at statistics. I
know the difficulties of a Spelling Reform, I know
what people lnean when they call it in1possible; but
I also kno,v that personal and national virtue con-
sists in doing so-called inlpossible things, and that
no nation has done, and has still to do, so 111any'im-
possible things as the English.
But, granted that reading, writing, and arithmetic
occupy nearly the ,vhole school time and absorb the
best powers of the pupils, cannot something be done
in play-hours? Is there not some ,york that can be
turned into play, and SOHle play that can be turned
into ,vork? Cannot the powers of observation be
called out in a child while collecting flo\vers, or
stones, or butterflies? Cannot his judgluent be

ON FREEDOM.

strengthened either in gYIIlnastic exerCIses, or In
measuring the area of a field or the height of a
tower? l\light not all this be done without a view
to examinations or paYl11ent by results, simply for
the sake of filling the little dull minds with one sun-
beatH of joy, such sunbeams being nlore likely here-
after to call hidden precious germs into life than the
deadening weight of such lessons as, for instance,
that th-ough is though, thr-ough is through, en-ough
is enough. A child WhO believes that will hereafter
believe anything. Those who wish to see Natural
Science introduced into elell1entary schools frighten
school-nlasters by the very l1anle of Natural Science.
But surely every school-master who is \vol'th his salt
should be able to teach children a love of Nature, a
,vondering at Nature, a curiosity to pry into the se-
crets of Nature, an acquisitiveness for SOIIle of the
treasures of Nature, and aU this acquired in the fresh
air of the field and the forest, where, better than in
frowzy lecture-rooms, the edge of the senses can be
sharpened, the chest widened, and that freedonl of
thought fostered which lllade England what it was
even before the days of compulsory education.
But in addressing you here to-night, it ,vas my in-
tention to speak of higher rather than of elenlentary
education.
All education - as it now exists in most countries
of Europe - may be divIded into three stages - ele-
mentary, scholastic, and academical
. or call it pri-
mary, secondary, and tertiar!J.
Elenlentary education has at last been nlade com-
pulsory in nlost civilized countries. Unfortunately,
however, it seems il11Possibie to include untIer C0I11-
pulsory education anything beyond the very elenlents

ON FREEDOM.

of knowledge - at least for the present; though I
kno\v from experience that, with proper managenlent,
a ,vell-conducted elenlentary school can afford to pro-
vide instruction in extra subjects - such as natural
science, modern languages, and political econonlY-
and yet, with the present systeul of governulent
grants, be self-supporting.!
The next stage above the elenlentary is scholastic
education, as it is supplied in granll11ar schools,
,vhether public or private. According as the pupils
are intended either to go on to a university, or to
enter at once on leaving school on the practical work
of life, these schools are divided into two classes.
In the one class, which in Gernlany are called Real-
schulen, less Latin is taught, arÙlno Greek, but nlore
of mathenlatics, nlodern languages, anù physical sci-
ence; in the other, called Gymnasia on the Conti-
nent, classics fOrIn the chjef staple of instruction.
It is during this stage that education, ,,,hether at
private or pub]ic schools, exercises its strongest lev-
elling influence. Little attention can be paid at large
schools to individual tastes or talents. In Gernlany
_ even nlore, perhaps, than in England - it is the
chief object of a good anù conscientious nlaster to
have his class as unifornl as possible at the end" of the
year; and he receives far nlore credit frolll the official
exanliner if his whole class lllarches well and keeps
pace together, than if he can parade a few brilliant
and for\Var boys, followed by a number of straggling
laggards.
And as to the character of the teaching at school,
how can it be other,vise than authoritative 01' dog-
matic? The Sokratic rncthod is very good if ,ve can
1 Times, January 25, 1879.

ON FREEDOM.

find the viri Soaratici and leisure for discussion. But
at school, which now 111ay seenl to be called alnlost in
n10ckery axoÀ
, or leisure, the true Inethod is, after
aU, that patronized by the great educators of the
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Boys at school
mnst turn their n1Ïnd into a ro,v of pigeon-holes, fill-
ing as nlany as they can with useful notes, and never
forgetting how many are empty. There is an im-
mense anlount of positive knowledge to be acquired
between the ages of ten and eighteen - rules of gram-
mar, strings of vocables, dates, nal11es of to\vns, rivers,
and 1110untains, 111atheI11atical forl11ulas, etc. All de-
pends here on the receptive and retentive po\vers of
the Inind. The Inemory has to be strengthened, \vith-
out being overtaxed, till it acts almost mechanically.
Learning by heart, I believe, cannot be too assid-
uously practised during the years spent at school.
There may have been too much of it \vhen, as the
Rev. II. C. Adall1s infornls llS in his" \V ykehanlica "
(p. 357), boys used to say by heart 13,000 and 14,000
lines, when one repeated the whole of Virgil, nay,
when another ,vas able to say the whole of the Eng-
lish Bible by rote: "Put hinl on where you \vould,
be would go fluently on, as long as anyone would
listen."
No intellectual investment, I feel certain, bears
such alnple and such regular interest as gelns of Eng-
lish, Latin, or Greek literature deposited in the nlenl-
ory during childhood and youth, and taken up frOIl1
till1e to tillle in the happy hours of solitude.
One fault I have to find ,vith 1110St schools, both in
England and on the Continent. Boys do not read
enough of the Greek and Roman classics. The 111a-
jority of our masters are scholars by profession, and

ü}J FREEDü
I.

they are apt to lay undue stress on ,vhat they call
accurate and ll1inute scholarship, and to neglect ,vide
and cursory reading. I kno\v the arglllnen ts for
n1Ïnute accuracy, but I also know the 111ischief that is
done by an exclusive devotion to critical scholarship
before 've have acquired a real fan1Ïliarity ,vith the
principal ,yorks of classical literature. The tinle spent
in our schools in learning the rules of granll11ar and
syntax, writing exercises, and cOlnposing verses, is too
large. Look only at our Greek and Latin gralnmars,
\vith all their rules and exceptions, and exceptions on
exceptions! It is too heavy a ,vpight for any boy to
carry; and no ,yonder that ,vhpn one of the thousand
small rules ,vhich they have learnt by heart is really
wanted, it is seldon1 fOl'thcon1Ïng. The end of clas-
sical teaching at school should be to nlake our boys
acquainted, not only with the language, but \vith the
literature and history, the ancient thought of the ftn-
cient ,vorlù. Rules of granllnar, syntax, or lnetre,
are but n1eans towards that end; they 11lUSt never be
mistaken for the end itself. A young Ulan of eight-
een, ,vho bas probably spent on an average ten years
in learning Greek and Latin, ought to be able to read
any of the ordinary Greek or Latin classics ,vithont
much difficulty; nay, with a certain alnonnt of pleas-
ure. He might have to consult his dictionary now
and then, or guess the meaning of certain words; he
nlight also feel doubtful s0111"etÍ1ne ,vhether certain
fonus canle froln iYJJ-tl, I send, or ETp.l, I go, or EÌp.t, I
anl, particularly if preceded by prepositions. In
these Ina tters the best scholars are least inclined to
be pharisaical; and ,vhenever I 111eet in the con-
troversies of classical scholars the favorite phrase,
" Every school-boy kIHHVS, or ought to kno\v, this," I

ON FREEDOM.

generally say to myself, " No, he ought not." Any-
how, those \vho \vish to see the study of Greek and
Latin retained in onr public schools ought to feel con-
vinced that it ,viII certainly not be retained much
longer, if it can be said with any truth that young
lnen \vho leave school at eighteen are in many cases
unable to read or to enjoy a classical text, unless they
have seen it before.
Classical teaching, and all purely scholastic teach-
ing, ought to be finished at school. 'Vhen a young
man goes to a University, unless he means to make
scholarship his profession, he ought to be f
'ee to enter
upon a new career. If he has not learnt by tbat time
so l11uch of Greek and Latin as is absolutely necessary
in after-life for a la\vyer, or a student of physical sci-
ence, or even a clergyman, either be or his school is
to blame. I do not nlean to say that it would not be
most desirable for everyone during his University
career to attend some lectures on classical literature,
on ancient history, philosophy, or art. \Vhat is to be
deprecated is, that the University should ha.ve to do
the work which belongs properly to the school.
Th best colleges at Oxford and Calnbridge have
shown by their 111atriculation examinations \vhat the
standard of classical know ledge ought to be at eight-
een or nineteeu. That standard can be reacbeù by
boys while still at school, as has been proved both by
the so-called local examinations, and by the ex
tlnina-
tions of schools held under the Delegates appointed
by the Universities. If, therefore, tbe University
would reassert bel' old right, and make the first ex-
anlination, called at Oxford Responsions, a general
matriculation exau1ination for ad 111ission to the U ni-
versity, not only would the public schools be stin1l1-

ON FREEDO
I.

lated to greater efforts, but the teaching of the U ni-
versity might assume, fron1 the very beginning, that
acadelnic character ,vhich ought to distinguish it from
mere school-boy work.
Acadelnic teaching ought to be not merely a con-
tinuation, but in one sense a correction of scholastic
teaching. \Vhile at school instruction must be chiefly
doglnatic, at the University is it to be Sokratic? for
I find no better nan1e for that n1ethod which is to set
a man free froln the burden of purely traditional
knowledge; to make hiln feel that the words which
he uses are often empty, that the concepts he em-
ploys are, for the most part, mere bundles picked
up at randolll; that even where he knows facts he
does not know the evidence for then1; and ,vhere he
expresses opinions, they are 1110Stly mere dogluas,
adopted by hin1 without exan1Ïnation.
But for the Universities, I should indeed fear that
:\liH's prophecies n1Ïght come true, and that the intel-
lect of Europe might drift into dreary nlonotony.
The Universities always have been, and, unless they
are diverted frolll their original purpose, always will
be, the guardians of the freedom of thought, the pro-
tectors of individual spontaneity; and it ,vas o,ving,
I believe, to Mill's want of acquaintance ,vith true
acaden1Ïc teaching that he took so desponding a view
of the generation gro\ving up under his. eyes.
\Vhen we leave school, our heads are naturally
brilnful of doglna - that is, of knowledge and opinions
at second-hand. Such dead knowledge is extremely
dangerous,. unless it is sooner or later revived by the
spirit of free inquiry. It does not lllatter ,vhether
our scholastic dogmas be true or false. The danger
is the same. And why? Because to place either

ON FREEDO:\i.

truth or error above the reach of argument is certain
to weaken truth and to strengthen error. Secondly,
because to hold as true on the authority of others
anything ,vhich concerns us deeply, and ,vhich ,ve
could prove ourselves, produces feebleness, if not dis-
honesty. And, thirdly, because to feel uIHvilling or
unable to n1eet objections by argun1ent is generally
the first step towards violence and persecution.
I do not think of religious doglnas only. They
are generally the first to rouse inquiry, even during
our school-boy days, and they are by no n1eans the
most difficult to deal with. Dogma often rages
where we least expect it. An10ng scientific 111en the
theory of evolution is at present becoming, or has
becolne, a dogma. \Vhat is the result ? No objec-
tions are listened to, no difficulties recognized, and a
man like Virchow, himself the strongest supporter of
evolution, who has the moral conrage to say that- the
descent of man frolll any ape whatsoever is, as yet,
before the tribunal of scientific zoölogy, " not proven,"
is howled down in Germany in a rnanner worthy of
Ephesians and Galatians. But at present I alll
thinking not so luuch of any special dognlas, but
rather of that dogulatic state of lnind which is the
ahnost inevitable res nIt of the teaching at school. I
think of the whole intellect, what has been caned
the intellectu8 8ibi pern
i88u8, and I maintain it is the
object of acadenlic teaching to rouse that intellect
out of its slu1l1ber by questions not less startling than
when Galileo asked the world whether the sun was
really nloving and the earth stood still; or \vhen
Kant asked ,vhether time and space were objects, or
necessary fornls of our sensuous intuition. Till our
opinions have thus been tested and stood the test,
we can hardly call them our own.

ON FREEDOM.

How true this is with regard to religion has been
boldly expressed by Bishop Beveridge.
"Being conscious to nlyself," he writes in his
,,, Private Thoughts on Religion," "ho\v great an as-
cendant Christianity holds over llle beyond the rest,
as being that religion ,vhereinto I was born and bap-
tized; that which the supren1e authority has enjoined
and my parents educated me in; that which every
one I 111eet ,vithal highly approves of, and ,vhich I
myself have, by a long-continued profession, nlade al-
1110St natural to HIe: I an1 resolved to be n10re jealous
and suspicious of this religion than of the rest, and he
sure not to entertain it any longer ,vitbout being
convinced, by solid and substantial arglunents, of the
truth and certainty of it."
This is bold and nlanl y language fron1 a Bishop,
nearly two hundred years ago, and I certainly think
that the time has conle \vhen SOl11e of the divinity
lecturers at Oxford and Cambridge n1Ïght ,vel! be
employed in placing a kl1o,vledge of the sacred books
of other religions "\vithin the reach of undergraduates.
l\lany of the difficulties - rnost of thelll of our own
Inaking - \vith regarù to the origin, the handing
down, the later corruptions and n1Ïsinterpretations
of sacred texts, \vould find their natural solution, if
it was shown how exactly the sanle difficulties arose
and had to be dealt with by theologians of other
creeds. If SOl1le - aye, if nlany - of the doctrines of
Christianity were nlet ,vith in other religions also,
surely that ,voulrl not affect their value" or dilnillish
their truth; \vhile nothing, I feel certain, would
more effectually secure to the pure and silnple teach-.
jug of Christ its true place in the historical develop-
111ent of the hUll1an nlÏnd than to place it side by side

ON FREEDOl\I.

with the other religions of the ,vor1d. In the series
of translations of the" Sacred Books of the East," of
which the first three vohllnes have just appeared,1 I
wished nlyse1f to include a ne\v translation of the
Old and Ne\v Testaments; and "Then that series is
finished it will, I believe, be adn1Ïtted that no\vhere
,vould these t,vo books have had a grander setting,
or have shone with a brighter light, than surrounded
by the Veda., the Zenda.vesta, the Buddhist Tripitaka,
and the Ql1r.ân.
But as I said before, I ,vas not thinking of re-
ligious dogll1as only, or even chiefly, ,vhen I n1ain-
taineër that the character of acaden1Ïc teaching 111ust
be Sokratic, not doglnatic. 1"'he evil of dogu1atic
teaching lies 111ucb deeper, and spreads nluch farther.
Think only of language, the work of other people,
not of ourselves, ,vhieh \ve pick up at rando1l1 in our
race through life. Does not èvery \vord \"e use re-
quire careful exan1Ïnation and revision? It is not
enough to s
y that language assists Ollr thoughts or
colors theIn, or possibly obscures thenl. No language
and thonght are indivisible. It was not frolTI pov-
erty of expression that the Greeks caned reason and
language by the saIne word, ÀÓYo
. It was because
they knew that, though ,ve 111ay distinguish between
thought and speech, as \ve distinguish between force
and function, it is as inlpossible to tear the one by
violence a\vay from the other as it is to separate the
concase side of a lens frorn its convex side. This is
something to learn and to understand, for, if, prop-
erly understood, \vill it supply the key to 1110st of our
intellectual puzzles, and serve as the safest thread
through the ,v1101e labyrinth of philosophy.
1 Sacred Books of the East, edited by 1\1. 1\1., vols. i. to ix. ; Claren.
dOll Press, Oxford, 187U and 1880.

-It

ON FREEDOM.

" It is evident," as Hobbes remarks,1 "that truth
and falsity have no place but anlongst such living
creatures as use speech. For though sonle brute
creatures, looking upon the inlage of a nlan in a glass,
nlay be affected ,vith it, as if it were the nlan hÏ1n-
self, and for this reason fear it or fawn upon it in
vain; yet they do not apprehend it as true or false,
but only as like; and in this they are not deceived.
Wherefore, as Illen o,ve all their true ratiocination
to the right understanding of speech, so also they
owe their errors to the misunderstanding of the sanle ;
and as all the ornanlents of philosophy proceed only
from nlan, so from nlan also is derived the ugly ab-
surdity of false opinion. For speech has sonlething
in it like to a spider's ,veb (as it \vas said of old of
Solon's laws), for by contexture of \yords tender a.nd
delicate 'vits are ensnared or stopped, but strong \vits
break easily through thenl."
Let nle illustrate nlY lneaning by at least one in-
stance.
Anlong the words which have proved spiùer's \vebs,
ensnaring even the greatest intellects of tlJe ,vorld
fronl Aristotle do\vn to Leibniz, the ternlS fJenus, spe-
cies, and individual occupy a very pron1Ïnent place.
The opposition of Aristotle to Plato, of the N olui-
nalists to the Realists, of Leibniz to Locke, of Her-
bart to Hegel, turns on the true Ineaning of these
\vords. At school, of course, all ,ve can do is to teach
the received meaning of genus and species; and if a
boy can trace these ternlS back to Aristotle's yÉvor; and

!òor;, and show in \vhat sense that philosopher used
them, every exan1Ïner ,vould be satisfied.
But the tilIle COllles when ,ve have to act as our

1 Computation or Logic, t. iii., yiii., p. 36.

ON FREEDOM.

. 33

own examiners, and when we have to give an account
to ourselves of such ,vords as genus- and species.
Some people write, indeed, as if they ha.d seen a
species and a genus walking about in broad daylight;
but a little consideration will sho,v us that these
,vords express subjective conc
pts, and that, if the
whole world were silent, there would never have been
a thought of a genus or a species. There are lan-
guages in which we look in vain for corresponding
words; and if we had been born in the atnlosphere
of such a language, these tern1S and thoughts would
not exist for us. They caIne to us, directly or iudi-
r
ct1y, from Aristotle. But Aristotle did not ill vent
them, he only defined them ill his own \vay, so that,
for instance, according to hiln, aU living beings ,vould
constitute a genus, n1en a species, and Sokrates an in-
dividual.
No one \vollld say that Aristotle had not a perfect
right to define these tenl1s, if those ,vho use then1 in
his sense would only ahvays rell1ember that they are
thinking the thoughts of Aristotle, and not their
o,vn. The true ,yay to shake off the fetters of old
words, and to learn to think our o,vn thoughts, is to
follow then1 up fron1 century to century, to watch
their developn1ent, and in the end to bring ourselves
face to face with those \vho first found and fnuned
both words and thoughts. If we do this with genus
and species, we shall find that the words ,vhich Aris-
totle defined - viz., yÉvof) and Eiúof) - had originally
a very different and far nlore useful application than
that ,vhich he gave to them. rÉVOf), genus, 111eant gen-
eration, and cOlllprehenùed such living beings only as
were believed to have a COnll110n origin, however they
might differ in outward appearance, as, for instance,
VOL. Y. 3

ON FREEDOM.

the spaniel and the bloodhound, or, according to Da.r-
win, the ape and the nlan. Elöo or species, on the
contrary, Ineallt appearance, and c0l11prehended aU
such things as had the sanle forn1 or appearance,
,vhether they had a C0111nl0n origin or not, as if \ve
,vere to speak of a species of four-footed, t,vo-footed,
horned, ,vinged, or blue aninlals.
That t,vo such concepts, as we have here explained,
had a natural justification \ve nlay best learn fronl the
fact tbat exactly the saIne thoughts found expression
in Sanskrit. There, too, ,ve find g â t i, generation,
used in the sense of genus, and opposeJ to f1 k r i ti,
appearance, used in the sense of species.
So long as these two words or thoughts ,vere used
independently (much as \ve now speak of a gene-
alogical as independent of a Inorphological classifica.-
tion) no harm could accrue. A falnily, for instance,
might be called a yÉvo
, the gens or clan \vas a yÉIIO
,
the nation (gnatio) was a yÉvo
, the ,vhole lUlll1an
kith and kin was a ylvo
; in fact, all that ,vas de-
scended fro III cOlnlllon ancestors 'vas a true yÉJlo
.
There is no obscurity of thought in this.
On the other side, taking Elöo or species in its orig-
inal sense, one lnan n1Ïght be said to be like another
in his Elòo or appearance. An ape, too, n1igh t quite
truly be said to have the sanle eIöo or species or ap-
pearance as a nlan, ,vithout any prejudice as to their
common origin. People n1Ïght also speak of differ-
ent Eïöl} or forn1s or classes of tb ings, such as differen t
kinds of meta
s, or tools, or armor, \vithout COllll11it-
ting themselves in the least to any opinion as to their
comnlon descent.
Often it would happen that things belonging to
the same yÉJlO
, such as the \vhite man and the negro,

ON FREEDO:\I.

differed in their ETúo or appearance; often also that
things belonged to the saIne E1óo'), such as eatables,
lliffered in their Yfl"OÇ, as, for instance, meat and vege-
tables.
All this is clear and silnple. The confusion began
,vhen these two ternls, instead of being coördinate,
were subordinated to each other by the philosophers
of Greece, so that ,vhat froln one point of vie\v ,vas
called a genu,s, rnight fronl another be called a spe-
cies, and vice versâ. I-Illluan beings, for instance,
,vere no\v called a species, all living beings a genus,
wh
ch Inay be true in logic, but is utterly false in
what is older than logic - viz., language, thought, or
fact. According to language, according to reason,
and according to nature, all 11l1l11an beings constitute
a yÉvoç, or generation, so long as they are supposed to
have conl1l10n ancestors; but \vith regard to all liv-
ing beings we can only say that they form an ETðOÇ-
that IS, agree in certain appeaeances, until it has
been proved that even 1\11'. Darwin .was too lnodest
in aJn1Ítting at least four or five different ancestors
for tbe \vhole anilnal ,vorld. 1
In tracing the history of these two \vards, yÚ'oç and
E1úoç, you Il1ay see passing before your eyes ahllost the
wbole panoranUt of philosophy, froll1 Plato's '
ideas "
do,vn to IIegel's Idee. The question of [Jenel"a, their
origin and subdivision, occupied chiefly the attention
of natural philosophers, who, after long controversies
about the origin and classification of genera and spe-
cies, seenl at last, thanks to the clear sight of Darwin,
to have arrived at the old truth ,vhich ,vas prefigured
in language - ll
nllely, that Nature kl1o\vS nothing

1 Lectures 01. l\Ir. Darwin's "Philosophy of Language," Fraser'.
M-agnÛne, J uue, 1873, p. 26.

ON FREEDOl\I.

but genera, or generations, to be traced back to a lim
ited nU111ber of ancestors, and that the so-caned spp-
cies are only genera, whose genealogical descent is as
yet more or less obscure.
But the question as to the nature of the ETòo be-
<,:une a vital question in every systeu1 of philosophy.
C;ranting, for instance, that \VOfnell in every clilne
and country formed one species, it was soon asked
\vhat constituted a species? If all \VOn1ell shared a
conl1110n forn1, \vhat \vas that {orIn? \Vhere ,va it ?
So long as it \vas supposed that all \VOlnen descended
frotn Eve, the difficulty 111igbt be slurred ovpr by the
nalne of heredity. But the Blore thoughtful \vould
ask even then ho\v it \vas that, while all individual
women caIne and \vent and vanished, the forin in
\vhich they were cast reulained the saIne?
IIer.e yon see ho\v plÚlosophical lnythology springs
up. 1:'he very question \vhat EI8() or species or fOrIn
\vas, and \vhere these things \vere kept, changed those
words fron1 predicates into subjects. Ei.)(} was con-
ceived as sOl11ething independent and substantial,
s0111ething within or above the individuals participat.
iug in it, sOlnething unchangeable and eternal. Soon
there arose as ll1any Ei8'Y) or fonus or types as there
were general concepts.
rhey \vere consillered the
only true realities of \vhich the phenonlenal world is
only as a shado\v that soon passeth a\vay. Here we
have, in fact, the origin of Plato's ideas, and of the
various systerns of iclealis111 \vhich followed his lead,
\vhile the opposite opinion that ideas have no inde-
pendent existence, and that the one is nowhere found
except in the many (r0
v 7fapà TÒ. 7foÀÀá), \vas strenu.
ously defended by Aristotle ana his followers. l

1 Pralltl, Geschiclde del" LoSik, yol. i. p. 121.

ON FREEDOM.

The same red thread runs through the whole phi-
losophy of the l\Iiddle Ages. 1\[en were cited before
councils and conllelnned as heretics because they de-
clared that aninlal, rnan, or W01nan were 111ere lUtll1es,
and tbat they could not bring theIl1Sel yes to believe
in an ideal anÏ1nal, an ideal Inan, an ideal wonlan as
the invisible, supernatural, or 111etaphysical types of
the ordinary aninlal, the individual 111an, tbe single
\VOlllan. Those philosophers, called Non
inalists, in
opposition to the Realists, decJared tbat all general
terlns were nanleS only, and that nothing could claÏ1n
reality but the individual.
vVe cannot follo\v this controversy farther, as it
turns up again between Locke and Leibniz, bet\veen
Herbart and IIegel. Suffice it to say that the knot,
as it was tied by language, can be untied by the sci-
ence of language alone, which teaches us that there
is and can be no such thing as "a n
Ulle only." That
phrase ought to be banished fronl all works on philos-
ophy. A name is and ahvays has been the subjective
side of our knowledge, but tbat subjective side is as
inlpossible ,vithout an objective side as a key is with-
out a lock. I t is useless to ask ,vhich of the two is
the nlore real, for they are real only by being, not
t\VO, but one. Realisnl is as one-sided as NOlninalism.
But there is a higher N on1ÏnalisI11, \vhich 11light bet-
ter be called the Science of Language, and which
teaches us that, apart fronl sensuous perception, aU
human knowledge is by names and by narnes only,
and that the object of nalnes is always the general.
This is but one out of hundreds and thousanùs of
cases to show ho\v l1ë.UlleS and concepts \vhich come
to us by tradition nlust be subluitted to very careful
snuffing before they \vill yield a pure light. \Vhat I

ON FREEDO
r.

Inean by acaden1Ïc teaching and acadelnic study is
exactly this process of sHuffing, this changing of tra-
ditional \vords into liying \vards, this tra(.ing of l110d-
ern thought back to ancient primitive thought, this
living, as it \vere, once n10re, so far as it concern!;
us, the whole history of IHllnan thought ourselves,
till \ve are as little afraid to differ frotn Plato 01'
Aristotle as froln COlllte or Dar\vin.
Plato and Aristotle are, no doubt, great names;
every school-boy is awed by thein, even though he
may 11ave read very little of their \vritings. r.rhis,
too, is a kind of dogn:1atisl11 that requires correction.
Now, at his University, a young student Blight chance
to hear the following, by no llleans respectful, re-
11larks about Aristotle, \vhich I copy frOlTI one of the
greatest English scholars and philosophers: "There
is nothing so absurd that the old philosophers, as
Cicero saith, who was one of thenl, have not sonle
of thelll l1utÏntained; and I believe that scarce any-
thing can he 1110re absurdly said in natural philosophy
than that \vhich no\v is called Aristotle's l\Ietaphys-
ics; or n10re repugnant to governlnellt than n1uch of
that he hath said in his Politics; nor more ignorantly
than a great part of his Ethics." laIn far frot11 ap-
proving this judgment, but I think that the shock
\vhich a young scholar receives on seeing his idols so
Inercilessly broken is salutary. It thl'O\VS hi(n back
on his o\vn resonrces; it Inakes hin1 honest to h1111-
self. If he thinks the criticislu thus passed on Ari
-
totle unfair, he will begin to read his \yorks with new
eyes. He \vill not only construe his \vords, but try
to reconstruct in his own Inind the thoughts so care-
fully elaborated by that ancient philosopher. lIe
will judge of their truth without being swayed by

O FREEDOl\{.

tIle authority of a great nalne, and probably in the
end value \vhat is valuable in Aristotle, or Plato, or
any other great philosopher far 1110re highly and hon-
estly than if he had never seen thenl trodden undpr
foot.
Do not suppose that I look upon the Universities
as purely iconoclastic, as chiefly intended to teach us
ho\v to break the idols of the schools. Far froll1 it !
But I do look upon them as nleant to supply a fresher
atmosphere than \ve breathed at school, and to shake
our mind to its very roots, as a storn1 shakes the
young oaks, not to throw thel11 down, but to 111ake
them grasp all the n10re firrnly the hard soil of fact
and truth! "Stand upright on thy feet" ought to
be \vritten over the gate of every college, if the epi-
del11ic of unifonnity and sequacity \vhich l\'lill saw
approaching fronl China, and \vhich since his time
has made such rapid progress 'Vestward, is ever to
be stayed.
Acadelnic freedom is not without its dangers; but
there are dangers \vhich it is safer to face than to
avoid. In Germany - so far as n1Y o\vn experience
goes - students are often left too luuch to thenlselves,
and it is only the cleverest an10ng theIn, or those who
are personally recon1n1ended, \vho receive froln the
professors that individual guidance and encourage-
111ent which should and could be easily extended to
all.
There is too 11luch tilne spent in the German Uni-
versities in ll1ere lecturing, and often in Sill1ply re-
tailing to a class \vhat each student Blight read ill
books in a far more perfect fornl. Lectures are use-
ful if they teach us how to teach ourselves; if they
stimulate; if they excite sYlnpathy and curiosity; if

ON FREEDOM.

they give advice that springs fronl personal expe-
rience ; if they \varn against wrong roads; if, in fact,
they have less the character of a sho\v-windo\v than
of a \vorkshop. Half an hour's conversation ,vith a
tutor or a professor often does 1110re than a whole
course of lectures in giving the right direction and
the right spirit to a young 11lan's studi
s. Here I
n1ay quote the words of Professor Helnlho1tz, in full
agreenlent with hinl. "When I recall the memory
of Iny own University life," he writes, "and the iln-
pression \vhich a nlan like Johannes l\lüller, the pro-
fessor of physiology, made on us, I nlust set the
highest value on the personal intercourse \vith teach-
ers from whom one learns how thought ,yorks in in-
dependent beads. Whoever has conle in contact but
once with one or several first-class Inen will find his
intellectual standard changed for life."
In English Universities, on the contrary, there is
too little of acaden1Ìc freedom. There is not only
guidance, but far too Inuch of constant personal con-
trol. It is often thought that English undergraduates
could not be trusted with that al110unt of acadelnic
freedom \vhich is granted to Gerlnan students, and
that nlost of thenl, if left to choose their own \vork,
their o\vn tÏ1ne, their own books, and their own teach-
ers, would silnply do nothing. This seen1S to Ine un-
fair and untrue. l\Iost horses, if you take them to
the \vater, will drink; and the best way to make
them drink is to leave thenl alone. I have Ii ved long
enough in English and in Gerlnan Universities to
kno\v that the intellectual fibre is as strong and sound
in the English as in the German youth. But if you
supply a lnan, who wishes to learn swinln1Ïng, \vith
bladders - nay, if you insist on his using thenl - he

ON FREEDO:\f.

will use them, but he will probably never learn to
s\vim. Take then1 away, on the contrary, and de-
pend on it, after a fe\v aimless strokes and a few pain-
ful gulps, he \vill use his arms and his legs, and he
\vill swin1. If young n1en do not learn to use their
arms, their legs, their muscles, their senses, their
brain, and their heart too, during the bright years of
their IJniversity life, when are they to learn it?
True, there are thousands "rho never learn it, and
who float happily on through life buoyed up on mere
bladders. 1:'he worst that can happen to them is that
some day the bladders n1ay burst, and they 111ay be
left straÚded or drowned. Burt these are not the men
whon1 England ,vants to fight her battles. It has
often been pointed out of late that lnany of those who
during this century have borne the brunt of the bat-
tle in the intellectual .warfare in England, have not
been trained at our Universities, ,vhile others who
have been at Oxford and Cambridge, and have distin-
guished themselves in after life, have openly declared
that they attended hardly any lectures in col1ege, or
that they derived no benefit fron1 then1. 'Vhat can
be the ground of that? Not that there is less ,york
done at Oxford than at Leipzig, but that the \vork
is done in a different spirit. It is free in Gern1any;
it has no\v becoll1e aln10st compulsory in England.
Though an old professor 111 yself, I like to attend,
,vhen I can, SOlne of the professorial lectures in
Germany; for it is a real- pleasure to see hundreds
of young faces listening to a teacher on the history of
art, on 1110dprn history, on the science of language, or
on philosophy, ,vithout any vie\v to exan1inations,
simply from love of the subject or of the teacher. No
one who knows what the real joy of Iparning i::;, how it

ON FREEDOM.

lightens all drudgery and dra\vs a\vay the nlind fron1
l11ean pursuits, can see \vithout indignation that what
ought to be the freest and happiest years in a ulan's
life should often be spent between cranll11ing and ex-
aminations.
And here I have at last nlentioned the word, ,vhich
to lllany friends of acaden1Ïc freedom, to n1any who
dread the baneful increase of uniforIllity, nlay Seell1
the cause of aU 1111schief, the most po"rerful engine
for in tellectuallevellil1g - Exa1nination.
There is a strong feeling springing up everywhere
against the tyranny of exanlinations, against the
cranlping and withering influence ,vhich they are
supposed to exercise on the youth of England. I
cannot join in that outcry. I well relllen1ber that
the first letters \\Thich I ventured to address to the
Times, in vpry imperfect English, were in favor of
exanlinations. They 'v ere signed La Garrière ouverte,
and ,,,ere ,,'ritten before the days of the Civil Service
Con1111Ïssion! I ,yell rell1elllber, too, that the first
tinle I ventured to speak, or rather to stallln1er, in
public, ,vas in favor of exall1inations. That ,vas in
1857, at Exeter, \vhen the first experilnent ,vas 11lade,
under the auspices of Sir T. Acland, in the direction
of ,vhat has since developed into the Oxford and
Call1 briòge Local Exalninations. I have been an ex-
an1iner l1lyself for I1lany years, I have ,vatched the
gro,vth of that systeu1 in England frolll year to year,
and, in spite of an that has been said and ,vritten of
late against it, I confess I do not see how it would be
possible to abolish it, and return to the old system of
appointulent by patronage.
But though I have not lost nlY faith in exan1Ïna-
tions, I cannot conceal the fact that I an1 frightened

ON PREEDOM.

by the nlanner in ,vhich they are conducted, and by
the results ,vhich they produce. As you are illter-
e
ted yourselves at this l\liJlal1d Institute in the suc-
cessful \vorking of exall1inations, you will perhaps
allow me in conclusion to add a few relnarks on the
safeguards necessary for the efficient working of ex-
an1Ïnations.
All examinations are a nleans to ascprtain how
pupils have been taught; they ought never to be
allo\ved to become the end for ,vhich pupils are
taught. Teaching ,vith a view to then1 lo,vers the
teacher in the ey.es of his pupils; learning \vith a
view to them is apt to produce shallowness and dis-
honesty.
'Vhatever attractions learning possesses in itself,
and \vhatever efforts \vere fOl'1ner1y 111ade by boys at
scbool from a sense of duty, aU this is lost if they
once inlagine that the highest object of all learning is
to gain marks in a conlpetition. .
In order to maintain tbe propPl" relation bet,veen
teacher and pupil, all pupils should be nlade to look
to their teaehers as their natural exan1Ïners ana fair-
est judges, and therefore in every exanÜnation the re-
port of the teacher ought to carry the greatest weight.
This is the principle followed abroad in exall1ining
candidates at public schools; and even in their exall1-
inatioll on leaving school, \vhich gives thenl the right
to enter the University, they kno\v that their success
depends far n10re on the ,york ,vhich they have done
during the years at school, than on the \vork done on
the fe\v days of their exan1Ïnation. There are outside
exalniners appointed by Governrnent to check the
work done at schools and during the excuninations;
but the cases in ,vhich they 11ave to modify or reverse

ON FREEDO
I.

the a ward of the n1aster are extrelnely rare, and they
are felt to reflect seriously on the competency or im-
partiality of the school authorities.
To leave exalninations entirely to strangers reduces
thetn to the level of lotteries, and fosters a cleverness
in teachers and taught often akin to dishonesty. An
exan1Ïner Inay find out what a candidate knows not,
he can hardly ever find out all he knows; and even if
he succeeds in finding out how rrnuch a candidate
kno\vs, he can seldon1 find out how he knows it. On
these points the opinion of the nlasters who have
watched their pupils for years is indispensable for the
sake of the examiner, for the sake of the pupils, and
for the sake of their teachers.
I know
I shall be told that it would be Ï1npossible
to trust the lnasters, and to be guided by their opin-
ion, because they are interested parties. N O\V, first
of all, there are far more honest men in the \vorld
than dishonest, and it. does not answer to legislate as
if all school-nlasters \vere rogues. It is enough that
they should kno,v that their reports would be scru-
tinized, to keep even the Inost reprobate of teachers
froln bearing false witness in favor of their pupils.
Secondly, I believe that unnecessary telnptation is
no\v being placed before all parties concerned in ex-
aminations. The proper reward for a good exanlina-
tion should be honor, not pounds, shillings, and pence.

rhe n1Ïschief done by pecuniary rewards offered in
the shape of scholarships and exhibitions at school
anù University, begins to be recognized very \videly.
To train a boy of t,vel ve for a race against all Eng-
land is generally to overstrain his faculties, anù often
to inlpair his usefulness in later life; but to make
him feel that by his failure he will entail on his fa-

ON FREEDOM.

ther the loss of a hundred a year, and on his teacher
the loss of pupils, is silnply cruel at that early age.
It is said that these scholarships and exhibitions
enable the sons of poor parents to enjoy the privilege
of the best education in England, from which they
would other,vise be debarred by the excessive costli-
ness of our public schools. But even this argunlent,
strong as it seems, can hardly stand, for I believe it
could be shown that the majority of those who are
successful in obtaining scholarships and exhibitions
at school or at the University are boys ,vhose parents
have been able to pay the highest price for their chil-
dren's previous education. If all these prizes were
abolished, and the funds thus set free used to lessen
the price of education at school and in college, I be-
lieve that the sons of poor parents \vould be far nlore
benefited than by the present systenl. It might also
be desirable to lower the school fees in the case of the
sons of poor parents, who \vere doing ,veIl at school
from year to year; and, in order to guard against
favoritism, an examination, particularly vivâ voce, be-
fore all the masters of a school, pos
ibly even with
some outside exan1Ïner, might be useful. But the
present systen1 bids fair to degenerate into n1ere
horse-racing, and I shall not wonder if, sooner or
later, the two-year olds entered for the race have to
be watched by their trainer that they 111ay not be
overfed or drugged against the day of the race. It
has conle to this, that schools are bidding for clever
boys in order to run thenl in the races, antI in France,
I read, that parents actually extort n10ney fl'Oln
schools by threatening to take away the young racers
that are likely to ,vin the Derby.l
1 L. Noir
, Pãda.'Jogisches Skizzenbuch, p. 157; "Todtes 'Vissen."

ON FREEDOM.

If we turn from the schools to the Universities we
find here, too, the saIne complaints against over-ex-
all1ination. N ow it seems to me that every U niver-
sity, in order to 111aintain its position, has a perfect
right to denland bvo exall1Ïnations, but no more: one
for adn1Ïssion, the other for a degree. Various at-
telnpts have been lIlade in Gernlany, in Russia, in
France, and in England to change and improve the
old acadenlic tradition, but in the end the original,
and, as it ,vould seem, the natural sys
eIn, has gen-
erally proved its wisdolll and reasserted its right.
If a University surrenders the right of exalnining
those ,vho wish to be ac1nlitted, the tutors will often
have to do tIle work of school-nlasters, and the profes-
sors can never kno\v ho\v high or how low they should
ail11 in their public lectures; and the result will Le a
lowering of the standard at the Universities, and con-
sequently at the public schools. SOBle Universities,
on the contrary, like over-anxiolls 1110thers, have 11lUl-
oJ
tiplied exarninations so as to 111ake quite sure, at the
end of each ternl or each year, that the pupils con-
fided to thenl have done at least SOllle work. ".rhis
kind of forced labor ll1ay do S0111e good to the incor-
rigibly idle, but it does the greatest hal'lll to an the
rest. If there is an exan1Ïnation at the end of each
year, there can be no freedonl left for any indepen-
dent ,york. Both teachers and taught will be guided
by the same pole-star - pxaulinations; 110 deviation
froln the beaten track ,,,ill be considered safe, and all
the plpasure derived fronl work done for its o,vn sake,
and all t.he just pride and joy, \vhich those only know
who bave ever ventured out by themselves on the
open sea of knowledge, nnlst be lost.
We 111USt not allo\v oursplv('s to be deceived by the
brilliant show of exmnination papers.

ON FREEDOl\I.

It is certainly nlarvellous ,vhat an anlount of
knowledge candidates will produce before their ex-
all1iners; but those ,vho have b
en both ex
tlnined
and exalniners kno,v best ho\v fleeting that knowl-
edge often is, and how different froln that other
knowledge which has been acquired slowly and
quietly, for its o,vn sake, for our own sake, ,vitl10ut
a thought as to \vhether it would ever pay at exan1Ï-
nations or not. A candidate, after giving nlost glibly
the dates and the titles of the principal ,yorks of
Cobbett, Gibbon, Burke, Adam Smith, and David
Hume, ,vas asked ,vhether he had ever seen any of
their writings, and he had to ans wpr, No. A not her-
,vho was asked which of the \vorks of Pheidias he
had seen, replied that he had only read the first two
books. This is the kind of dishonest kno,vledge
which is fostered by too frequent exalllinations.
There are two kinds of kno,vlf'dge, the one that
enters into onr very blood, the other which we carry.
about in our pockets. Those who read for exanlina-
tions }1ave generally their pockets craIn full; those
,vho work on quietly and have their \vhole heart in
their work are often discouraged at the Sl11all al110unt
of their kno,vledge, at the little life-bl:)od they have
made. But what they have learnt has really become
their own, has invigorated their \vhole fraIne, and in
the end they have often proved the strongest and
happiest men in the battle of life.
Onlniscience is at present the bane of all our
kno,vledge. FrOln the day he leaves school and
enters the U niyersity a man ought to ll1ake np his
mind that in nlany things he must either renlain
altogether ignorant, or be satisfied with knowledge
at second-hand. Thus only can he clear the decks

ON FREEDO
I.

for actIon. And the sooner 11e finds out what his
own ,vork is to be, the nlore useful and delightful
will be his life at the University and later. 'fhere
are fe\v 111 en who bave a passion for all kno,vledge;
there is hardly one ,vbo has not a hobby of his o,vn.
Those so-called hobbies ought to be utilized, and not,
as they are now, discouraged, if ,ve ,vish our Univer-
sities to produce nlore 111en like Faraday, Carlyle,
Grote, or Darwin. I do not say that in an ex
ul1ina-
tion for a University degree a nlininlum of ,vhat is
no,v called general culture should not be insisted on ;
but in addition to that, far more freedolll ought to
be gi yen to the examiner to let each candidate pro-
duce his o'vn individual ,vork. rrhis is done to a far
greater extent in Continental than in English Uni-
versities, and the exau1inations are therefore 1110stly
confided to the melnbers of the Sfenatus Acadelllicus,
consisting of the most experi
nced teachers, and the
nlost en1Ïnent representatives of the different branches
of knowledge in the University. Their object is not
to finù out ho\v nutny nULrks each candidate Inay
gain Ly answering a larger or smaller nlllnber of
questions, and then to place thenl in order before
the .world like so 111allY organ pipes. 1')H
y "rant to
find out whether a Blan, by the work he has done
during his three or fonr University years, has ac-
quired that vigor of thought, that nlatul'ity of judg-
Inent, and that special kno,vledge, ,vhich fairly entitle
him to an acaden1Ïc degree ,vith or .without speeial
honors. Such a. dt'gree confers no n1aterial ad van-
tages ; 1 it does not entitle its holder to any ell1ploy-
ment in Church or State; it does not vouch even for
his being a fit person to be Blade an Archbishop or
1 Mill On Liberty, p. 193.

ON FREEDOM.

Prime l\Iinister. All this is left to the later struggle
for life; and in that struggle it seeIns as if those \vho,
after having surveyed the vast field of hUl11an knowl-
edge, have .settled on a few acres of their own and
cultivated thenl as they were never cultivated before,
who have worked hard and bave tasted the true joy
and l)appiness of hard ,vork, ,vho have gladly list-
ened to others, but always depended on thenlselves,
were, after all, the men whom great nations de-
lighted to follow as their royal leaders in the on ward
march towards greater enlightenment, greater happi-
ness, and greater freedonl.
To sum up, no one can read Mill's Essay "On
Liberty" at the present mOlnent without feeling that
even during the short period of the last twen ty years
the cause ,vhich he advocated so strongly and pas-
sionately, the cause of individual freedo111, has made
rapid progress - aye, has carried the day. In no
country may a nlan be so entirely himself, so true to
himself, and yet loyal to society, as in England.
But, although the enemy ,vhose encroachments
Mill feared Inost and resented most has been driven
back and forced to keep within his own bounds-
though such nanles as Dissenter and Nonconformist,
which were formerly used in society as fatal darts,
seem to have l08t aU the poison ,vhich they once con-
tained -l\Iill's principal fears have nevertheless not
been belied, and the blight of uniforn1Ïty \vhich he
saw approaching ,vith its attendant evils of feeble-
ness, indifference, and sequacity, has been spreading
more widely than ever.
It has ever been nlaintained that the very free-
dom which every individual no,v enjoys has been
detrimental to the growth of individuality; that you
VOL. v. 4.

ON FREEDOM.

must have an Inquisition if you want to see Inartyrs,
that you must have despotism and tyranny to call
forth heroes. The very measures which the friends
of individual developn1ent advocated so warlnly, con1-
pulsory education and cOll1petitive exan1inations, are
pointed out as having chiefly contributed to produce
that large array of pass-men, that dead level of un-
interesting excellence, which is the beau idéal of a
Chinese Mandarin, while it frightened and disheart-
ened such n1en as Humboldt, Tocqueville, and John
Stuart 1\1ill hin1self.
Tbere may be some truth in all this, but it is cer-
tainly not tbe whole truth. Education, as it has to
be carried on, ,vheth
r in elell1entary or in public
schools, is no doubt a heavy ,veight which 111ight
well press down the most independent spirit; it is,
in fact, neither more nor less than placing, in a sys-
tematized form, on the shoulders of every generation
the ever-increasing mass of knowledge, experience,
custom, and tradition that has been accunlulated by
former generations. 'Ve need not wonder, therefore,
if in some schools all spring, aU vigor, all joyousness
of work is crushed out under that load of nan1CS
and dates, of anomalous verbs and syntactic rules,
of mathematical formulas and geometrical theories
which boys are expected to bring up for competi-
tive examinations.
But a remedy has been provided, and \ve are our-
selves to biaille if ,ve do not avail ourselves of it to
the fullest extent. Europe erected its Universities,
and called them the hOllles of the Liberal Arts, and
determined that between the lnental slavery of the
school and the physical slavery of busy life every
man should bave at least three years of freedom.

ON FREEDOM.

What Sokrates and his great pupil Plato had done
for the youth of Greece, l these lle\V acadelnies were
to do for the youth of Italy, France, England, Spain,
and Germany; and, though \vith varying success,
they have done it. The mediæval and modern Uni-
versities have been from century to century the
hOlnes of free thought. Here the most eminent Inen
have spent their lives, not in retailing traditional
knowledge, as at school, but in extending the fron-
tiers of science in all directions. Here, in close in-
tercourse \vith their teachers, or under their inlme-
diate guidance, generation after generation of boys
fresh from school have gro\vn up into men during
the three years of their academic life. Here, for the
first time, each Inan has been encouraged to dare to
be himself, to follo\v his o\vn tastes, to depend on his
own judgnlent, to try the wings of his mind, and, 10,
like young eagles thrown out of their nest, they
could fly. Here the old knowledge accunlulated at
school \vas tested, and new kno\vledge acq n ired
straight from the fountain-head. Here knowledge
ceased to be a mere burden, and became a power in-
vigorating the whole n1Ïnd, like snow which during
winter lies cold and heavy on the nleado\vs, but
when it is touched by the sun of spring Inelts away,
and fertilizes the ground for -a rich harvest.
That was the original purpose of the Universities;
and the more they continue to fulfil that purpose,
the more will they secure to us that real freedoIl1
fronl tradition, from custom, froln Inere opinion and
superstition, which can be gained by independent
study only; the more \vill they foster that" human

1 Zeller, Ueber den wissenschaftlichen Unterricltt bei den Gl.iechen,
1878, p. 9.

ON FREEDOM.

developnlent in its richest diversity" which Mill, like
HUlnboldt, considered as the highest object of all so-
ciety.
Such academic teaching need not be confined to
the old Universities. There is many a great Uni-
versity that sprang from slnaller beginnings than
your l\Iidland Institute. Nor is it necessary, in or-
der to secure the real benefits of academic teaching,
to have all the paraphernalia of a University, its col-
leges and fellowships, its caps and gowns. vVhat is
really wanted is the presence of men who, having
done good work in their life, are willing to teach
others how to work for themsel Yes, ho\v to think for
themselves, ho\v to judge for themselves. That is
the true acad
mic stage in every man's life, when he
learns to work, not to pleas others, be they school-
masters or examiners, but to please hilnself, when he
works fron1 sheer love of work, and for the highest
of all purposes, the quest of truth. Those only who
have passed through that stage know the real bless-
ings of work. To the ,vorld at large they may seem
mere drudges - but the world does not know the
triulnphant joy with which the true mountaineer,
high above clouds and mountain walls that once
seen1ed unsurpassable, drinks in the fresh air of the
-High Alps, and away fron1 the fumes, the dust, and
the noises of the city, revels alone, in freedom of
thought, in freedom of feeling, and in the freedolu of
the highest faith.

II.

ON THE

PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY.

A LECTURE DELIVERED AT THE ROYAL INSTITU-
TION IN 1871.

'VHAT can be in our days the interest of mythol-
ogy? 'Vhat is it to us that J{ronos was the son of
Uranos and Gaia, and that he swallowed his children,
Hestia, Demeter, Hera, Pluton, and Poseidon, as soon
as they were born? 'Vhat have we to do with the
stories of Rhea, the wife of J{ronos, who, in order to
save her youngest son Ironl being swallowed by his
father, gave her husband a stone to swallo\v instead?
And why should we be asked to admire the exploits
of this youngest son, who, \vhen he had gro,vn up,
made his father drink a draught, and thus helped to
deliver the stone and his five brothers and sisters from
their paternal prison? vVhat shall we think if \ve
read in the most admired of classic poets that these
escaped prisoners became afterwards the great gods
of Greece, gods believed in by Horner, \vorshippeJ by
Sokrates, imlTIortalized by Pheidias? "Thy should
\"e listen to such horrors as that Tan talos killed his
own son, boiled hinl, and placed him before the gods
to eat? or that tbe gods collected his limbs, threw
them into a cauldron, and thus restored Pelops to
life, minus, h9wever, his shoulder, \vhich Denleter

54 ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY.

had eaten in a fit of absence, and which had therefore
to be replaced by a shoulder 111ade of ivory?
Can we illla.gine anything more silly, Inore savage,
more senseless, anything nlore un worthy to engage
our thoughts, even for a single mOll1ellt? vVe may
pity our children that, in order to kno,y ho\v to con-
strue and understand the master-works of Homer and
Virgil, they have to fill their memory \vith such idle
tales; but we might justly suppose that men who
have serious work to do in this world would banish
such subjects forever from their thoughts.
And yet, how strange, frolll the very childhood of
philosophy, frolll the first faintly-,vhispered Why? to
our own tÏtne of 111atured thought and fearless in-
quiry, mythology has been the ever-recurrent subject
of anxious wonder and careful study. The ancient
philosophers, 'v ho could pass by the petrified shells
on mountain-tops and the fossil trees buried in their
quarries without ever asking the question how they
came to be there, or what they signified, ,vere ever
ready with doubts and surmises when they caIne to
listen to ancient stories of their gods and heroes.
And, more curious still, even modern philosophers
cannot resist the attraction of these ancient problell1s.
That stream of philosophic thought which, sprInging
from Descartes (1596-1650), rolled on through the
seventeenth and eight
enth centuries in t,vo beds-
the idealistic, n1arked by the names of Malebranche
(1638-1715), Spinoza (1632-1677), and Leibniz
(1646-1716); and the sensualistic, marked by the
names of Locke (16g2-170-!), David llume (1711-
1776), and Condillac (1715-1780), till tJle t,vo arms
united again in l{ant (1724-1804), and the full
stream was carried on by Schelling (1775-1854), and

ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY. 55

Hegel (1770-1831),-tbis streanlof modern philo-
sophic thought has ended \vhere ancient philosophy
hegan - in a Philosophy of l\tlythology, which, as

'ou know, fonns the nIost inIportant part of Schel-
ling's final syst
ln, of what he called himself his Pos-
itive Philosophy, given to the "\vorld after the death
of that great thinker and poet, in the year 185-1.
I do not mean to say that Schelling and Aristotle
looked upon mythology in the sanIe light, or that
they found in it exactly the same problems; yet there
is this common feature in all who have thought or
written on mythology, that they look upon it as
something \vhich, \vhatever it nIay mean, does cer-
tainly not mean wbat it seems to mean; as sOlnething
that requires an explanation, whether it be a system
of religion, or a phase iù the developulent of the hu-
man n1Ïnd, or an inevitable catastrophe in the life of
language.
According to some, 111ythology is history changed
into fable; according to others, fable changed into
history. SOlne discover in it the precepts of p10ral
philosophy enunciated in the poetical language of an-
tiquity; others see in it a picture of the great fornls
and forces of nature, particularly the sun, the l1I00n,
and the stars, the changes of day and night, the suc-
cession of the seasons, the return of the years - all
this reflected by the vivid imagination of ancient
poets and sages.
Epicharmos, for instance, the pupil of Pythagoras,
declared that the gods of Greece \vere not \vhat, frolll
the poems of HOlner, "\ve Il1ight suppose them to be-
. personal beings, endo\ved with superhuman powers,
4 but liable to Inany of the passions and frailties of
human nature. He Inaintained that these gods were

56 ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY.

really the 'Vind, the 'Vater, the Earth, the Sun, the
Fire, and the Stars. Not long aftpr his tilne, another
philosopher, Enlpedoldes, holding that the \vhole of
nature consistpd in the mixture and separation of the
four elen1ents, declared that Zeus was the element
of Fire, Here the elelllent of Air, Aidoneus or Plu-
ton the element of Earth, and N estis the element of
Water. In fact, whatever the free thinkers of Greece
discovered successively as the first principles of Being
and Thought, ,vhether the air of Anaximenes, or the
fire of Herakleitos, or the N ous or l\lind of Anaxag-
oras, was readily identified with Zeus and the other
divine persons of OIYll1pian mythology. IVletrodoros,
the contelnporary of Anaxagoras, went even farther.
While Anaxagoras would have been satisfied \"ith
looking upon Zeus as but another nalne of his Nous,
the highest intellect, the mover, the disposer, the gov-
ernor of all things, l\letrodoros resolved not only the
persons of Zeus, Here, and Athene, but likewise those
of human kings and heroes - such as Agamemnon,
Achilles, and Hektor - into various cOlllbinations and
physical agencies, and treated the adventures ascribed
to theln as natural facts hidden under a thin veil of
allegory.
Sokrates, it is well known, looked upon such at-
tempts at eXplaining all fables allegorically as too
arduous and unprofitable: yet he, too, as well as
Plato, pointed frequently to what they called the hy-
p6noia, the under-current, or, if I Inay say so, the
under-meaning of ancient mythology.
Aristotle speaks In ore explicitly: -
"It has been handed down," he says, " by early
and very ancient people, and left to those \vho canle
after, in the forin of myths, tha.t these (the first prin-

ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY. 57

ciples of the world) are the gods, and that the divine
embraces the whole of nature. The rest has been
added mythically, in order to persuade the nlany, and
in order to be used in support of laws and other in-
terests. Thus they say that the gods have a lUl111an
form, and that they are like to sonle of the other Ii v-
ing beings, and other things consequent on this, and
sin1Ïlar to what has been said. If one sepa.rated out
of these fables, and took only that first point, namely,
that they believed the first essences to be gods, one
would think that it had been divinely said, and that
while every art and every philosophy was probably
invented ever so many times and lost again, these
opinions had, like fragnlents of them, been preserved
until now. So far only is the opinion of our fathers,
and that received from our first ancestors, clear to
us. "
I have quoted the opinions of these Greek philoso
phers, to which many lllore might have been added,
partly in order to show how many of the 1110st distin
guished Ininds of ancient Greece agreed in delnanding
an interpretation, whether physical or metaphysical,
of Greek Inythology, partly in order to satisfy those
classical scholars, ,vho, forgetful of their o,vn classics,
forgetful of their own Plato and Aristotle, seem to
imagine that the idea of seeing in the gods and heroes
of Greece anything beyond what they appear to be
in the songs of Homer, was a. Inere fancy and inven-
tion of the students of Comparative Mythology.
There were, no doubt, Greeks, and eminent Greeks
too, who took the legends of their gods and heroes in
their literal sense. But what do these say of JIon1er
and Hesiod? Xenophanes, the contemporary of Pyth-
agoras, holds Homer and Hesiod responsible for the

58 ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY.

popular superstitions of Greece. In this he agrees
with Herodotus, when he declares that these t,vo
poets lnade the theogony for the Greeks, and gave to
the gods their naines, and assigned to them their hon-
ors and their arts, and described their appearances.
But be then continues in a very different strain froln
the pious historian} "Honler," he says,2 " and I-Ie-
siod ascribed to the gods ,vhatever is disgraceful and
scandalous alnong men, yea, they declared that the
gods had comn1Ïtted nearly all unlawful acts, such as
theft, adultery, and fraud." "l\fen seen1 to have
created their gods, and to have given to theln their
o,vn mind, voice, and figure. The Ethiopians lllade
their gods black and flat-nosed; the Thracians red-
haired and blue-eyed." This ,vas spoken about 500
B. c. Herakleitos, about 460 B. c., one of the bold-
est thinkers of ancient Greece, declared that IIoiner
deserved to be ejected fronl public assenlblies and
flogged; and a story is told that Pythagoras (about
540 B. c.) saw the soul of HOIl1er in Hades, hanging

1 Her. ii. 53, O
TOt
é ei
t oi 7TOt
UaV'J'ES' 8eoyoví'l'jV v EÀÀ'I'}ut, <<aì. TOtUt ()eotut TàS'
È1Twvvp.íaS'
ÓI'TeS' lCaì. np.å.S' Te lCaì. TéXl'aS'
teÀóvTeS', lCaì. eL
ea aVTWV u'l'}p.-r}vavTeS'.
2 IIå.v'Ta 8eotS' åvéO'l'}lCav vOp.'I'}PÓS' O' 'lIuíoMS' 'Te
öuua 7Tap' åv8 p W1TOtUt òveí
ea lCaì. iþóyoS' ÈU'Tív.
wS' 1TÀ
îuT' Ècþ8éy
avTo 8ewv àeeJ.tiuTta Ëpya,
ICÀé1TTEtV p.otxevEtv 'TE lCaì. å

ÀovS' å1TaTEVEtv.
Sext. Emp. adv. lI[ath. 1289 ; ix. 193.

olCéovut 8eoÌJS' yeyev1] u Oat
ri]v U
ETépYJv T' a'iuOT}utJ 1 ÉXEtV cþwv
v 'TE
Ép.aS' TE.-
'A.A.À' eLTOt XEtpáS' y' e1xoJl ßóeS'
È ÀÉOJl'TeS'
í1 ypáiþat xeipeuut lCaì. Ëpya 'TEÀetV å1Tep líJl8p
S',
<<aí ICE Oewv iUaS' Éypacþov lCaì. uwp.a'T' È1Toiovv
'Totaû8' oIóv 1T.p lCav'Toì. Up.aS' e!xov òp.oîov,
'i1T1TOt p.ÉJI 8' t1T1TOtUt, ßóeS'
É TE ßovuì.v òp.ota.
Clem. Alex. Strom. v. p. 601, c.

"OS'
YJUtv 'i!!.Evotþávy]S'. AWio1TÉfò TE p.ÉÀava<; Utp.ovS' 'TE, ep
ICÉS' TE 7TVppOÌJS' <<at
yÀavlCov<;. Clem. Alex. Strom. vii. p. 711, B. Historia Philosophiæ, ed.
Ritter et PrelIer, cap. iii.

ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY. 5D

on a tree and surrounded by serpents, as a punish-
nlpnt for what he had said of the gods. And what
can be stronger than the condenlnation passed on
HOll1er by Plato? I shall read an extract fronl the
"Republic," from the excellent translation lately
published hy Professor Jowett:-
"But wbat fault do you find ,vith HOlner and
Hesiod, and the other great story-tellers of man-
kind? "
"A fault which is most serious," I said: "the fault
of telling a lie, and !t bad lie."
" But when is this fault connnitted ? "
"Whenever an erroneous representation is made
of the nature of gods and heroes -like the dL'a\ving
of a liInner which has not the shado,v of a likeness
to the trutb."
" , Yes,' he said, 'that sort of thing is certainly
very blamable; but what are the stories ,vhich yon
nlean ? '
" , First of all,' I said, , there was that greatest of
all lies in high places, ,vhich the poet told about
Dranos, and \vhich ,vas an inlnlorallie too - I nlean
\vhat IIcsiod sa.ys that Uranos did, and what !{ronos
dill to hinl. The fact is that the doings of l{ronos,
and the sufferings which his son inflicted npon him,
even if they ,,,ere true, ought not to be lightly told
to young and simple persons; if possible, they had
better be buried in silence. But if there is an abso-
lute necessity for their nlpntion, a very fe\v lllight
hear thenl in a nlystery, and then let thenl sacrifice
not a conlnlon (Eleusinian) pig, but some huge and
unprocurable victÏ1n; this would have the effect of
very greatly reducing the nUlnber of the hearers.'
" , vVhy, yes,' said he, 'these stories are certainly
objectionable.'

60 ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF :\IYTHOLOGY.

" , Yes, Adeimantos, they are stories not to be nar-
rated in our state; the young luan should not be told
that in cOlnn1Ïtting the worst of crilnes he is far frotH
doing anything outrageous, and that he lnay chastise
his father when he does ,vrol1g in any nlanner that
he likes, and in this will only be follo,vin the exa.rll-
pIe of the first and greatest of the gods.

" 'I quite agree with you,' he said; 'in my opin-
ion those stories are not fit to be repeated.'
" , Neither, if \ve mean our future guardians to re-
gard the habit of quarrelling as dishonorable, should
anything be said of the ,val'S in heaven, and of the
plots and fightings of the gods against one another,
which are quite untrue. Far be it frcnn us to tell
them of the 1?attles of the giants, and ernòroider thenl
on gannents; or of all the inlHlll1erable other qnar-
rels of gods and heroes with their friends and rela-
tions. If they would only believe us, ,ve would tell
thenl that quarrelling is unholy, and that never up to
this tilne has there been any quarrel bebveen citi-
zens; this is wl}at old lHen and old WOlnen should
begin by telling children, and the sanle ,vhen they
grow up. And these are the sort of fictions which
the poets should be required to COl1lpose. But the
narrative of Hephaestos binding Here his lllother, or
how, on another occasion, Zeus sent him flying for
taking her part when she ,vas being beaten - such
tales must not be adn1Ïtted in our stat
, whether they
are supposed to have an allegorical nleaning or not.
For the young man cannot judge ,vhat is allegorical
and what is literal, and anything that he receives
into his mind at that age is apt to beC0l11e indelible
and unalterable; and therefore the tales ,vhich they
first hear should be lnodels of virtuous thoughts.' "

ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY. (j 1

To those who look upon nlythology as an ancient
fornl of religion, such freedonl of language as is here
used by Xenophanes and Plato, must seenl startling.
If the Iliad were really the Bible of the Greeks, as it
llas not unfrequently been called, such violent invec-
tives would have been inlpossible. For let us bea.r
in n1ind that Xenophanes, tbough he boldly denied
the existence of all the lnythological deities, and
declared his belief in One God, "neit
ler in form nor
in thought like unto n10rta.ls," 1 was not therefore
considered a heretic. He never suffered for uttering
his honest convictions: on the contrary, as far as "\ve
kno,v, he was honored by the people
unong whom he
lived and taught. N or ,vas Plato ever punished on
account of his unbelief, and though he, as well as his
master, Sokrates, becalne obnoxious to the don1inant
party at Athens, this ,vas due to political far lllore
than to theological nlotives. At all events, Pla.to, the
pupil, the friend, the apologist of Sokrates, was al-
lO1.ved to teach at Athens to the end of his life, and
few men commanded greater respect in the best ranks
of Greek society.
But, although mythology was not religion in our
sense of the word, and although the Iliad certainly
never enjoyed among Greeks the authority either of
the Bible, or èven of the Veda alnong the Brahnlans,
or the Zend A vesta among the Pa.rsis, yet I \vonld
not deny altogether that in a certain sense the lllY-
thology of the Greeks belonged to their religion. \Ve
must only be on our guard, here as everywhere else:
against the misleading influence of "\vords. The word

1 Etç Ðeòç Ëv TE ÐeoLuL Kaì. åvÐpwrroLuL P.ÉYLUTOÇ,
oü n ðép.aç ÐV1]To'iUL òP.OtU)I) oUè vÓYJp.a.
Clem. Alex. Strom. v. p. 601, c.

62 ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY.

Religion has, like most ,vords, had its history; it has
grown and changed with each century, and it cannot,
therefore, have 111eant ,vith the Greeks and Bralullans
what it l11eans ,vith us. Religions have sonl
tin1es
been divided into national or traditional, as distin-
guished fronl individual or statutable religion. The
fonner are, like languages, 110me-grown, autochthonic,
without an historical beginning, generally without
any recognized founder, or even an authorized code;
the latter have been founded by historical persons,
generally in antagonisln to traditional systems, and
they al \vays rest on the authority of a ,vritten code.
I do not consider this division as very useful I for a
scientific study of religion, because in l1lany cases it
is extrelnely difficult, and sonletill1eS inl possible, to
dra\v a sharp line of delnarcation, and to determine
whether a given religion shoulù be considered as the
,vork of one lnan, or as the conl billed work of those
who catne before hinl, who lived ,vith hinl, nay, even
of those ,vho came after him. For our present p1il.r-
pose, however, for sho,ving at once the salient differ-
ence between what the Greeks and what \ve ourselves
should n1ean by Religion, this division is very service-
able. The Greek religion was clearly a national anù
traditional religion, and, as such, it shared both the
advantages and disad vantages of this fornl of religious
belief; the Christian religion is an historical and, to
a great extent, an individual religion, and it possesses
the advantage of an a.uthorized code and of a settled
systen1 of faith. Let it not be supposed, ho\vever,
that bet,veen traditional and individual religions thp
advantages are all on one, the disadvantages on the
other side. As long as the in1l11enlorial religions of
1 See Introduction to the Science ()f ReZi,qion, p. 139.

ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY. 63

the different branches of the hUll1an race relnained in
their natural state, and were not pressed into the ser-
vice of political parties or an aUlbitions priesthood,
they allowed great freedom of thought and a healthy
growth of real piety, and they were seldon1 disgraced
by an intolerant or persecuting spirit. They \vere
generally either honestly believed, or, as we have just
seen, honestly attacked, and a high tone of intellect-
ual morality ,vas preserved, unta.inted by hypocrisy,
equivocation, or unreasoning dognlatisll1. The Inar-
vellous development of philosophy in Greece, particu-
larly in ancient Greece, ,vas chiefly due, I believe, to
the absence of an established religion and an influen-
tial priesthood; and it is ill1possible to overrate the
blessing which the fresh, pure, invigorating, and ele-
vating air of that ancient Greek philosophy lIas con-
ferred on all ages, not excepting our own. I shudder
at the thought of what the world would have been
\vithout Plato and Aristotle, and I treIl1ble at the
idea that the youth of the future should ever be de-
prived of the teaching and the exanlple of these true
prophets of the absolute freedoll1 of thought. Un-
fortunately, we kno\v but little of the earliest fathers
of Greek philosophy; we have but fragu1ents, and
those not ahvays trustworthy, nor easily intelligible,
of what they taught on the highest questions that can
stir the heart of man. 'Ve have been accustonled to
call the oracular sayings of n1en like Thales, Pythag-
oros, Xenophanes, or Herakleitos, philosophy, but
there was in thenl as much of religion as in t.he songs
of Houler and Hesiod. Homer and IIesiod were
great powers, but their poems \vere not the only
feeders of the religious life of Greece. The strealll
of ancient wisdoln and philosophy flo\ved parallel with

64 O:N THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY.

the stream of legend and poetry; and both \vere I11eant
to support the religious cravings of the soul. 'Ve
have only to attend \vithout prejudice to the utter-
ances of these ancient prophets, such as Xenophanes
and Herakleitos, in order to convince ourselves that
these men spoke with authority to the people,l that
they considered thelTIselves the equals of Homer and
Hesiod, nay, their betters, and in no ,vay fettered by
the popular legends about gods and goddesses. 'Vhile
modern religions aSSlune in general a hostile attitude
towards philosophy, ancient religions have
ither in-
cluded philosophy as an integral part, or they have
at least tolerated its growth in the very precincts of
their ten1 pIes.
After ,ve bave thus seen ,vl1at lilnitations we must
place on the meaning of the ,vord Religion, if we call
mythology the religion of the ancient world, we may
now advance another s
cp.
We have glanced at the principal interpretations
which have been proposed by the ancients theIl1selves
of the original purpose and nleaning of nlythology.
But there is one qnestion which none, either of the
ancient or of the n10dern interpreters of Inythology,
has answered, or even asked, and on which, neverthe-
less, the whole probleln of mythology seeins to turn.
If n1ythology is history changed into fabl
, why ,vas
it so changed? If it is fable represented as history,
why were such fables invented? If it contains pre-
cepts of moral philosophy, whence their imn10ral dis-
guise? If it is a picture of the great forms and forces
of nature, the same question still returns, why ,vere
1 Empedokles, Carmina, v. 411 (F.,.agm. Pltilos. G1'æc. vol. i. p. 12):-
w <þiÀo L, otða p.Èv ovv ÓT' åÀT}Oei T} 7rapà p. v8 0LÇ
ovç Èyw ÈEepiw. p.áÀa ð' å.pya.Àè'1 yÈ TfTVKTaL
å.v8páO'L Kaì ôVO'
1]).oç È7Tì if>péva 7riO'noç òpp.1Í.

ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY. 65

these fOl'lIlS and forces represented as heroes and
heroines, as nymphs and shepherds, as gods and
goddesses? It is easy enough to call the sun a god,
or the da\vn a goddess, after these predicates have
once been framed. But 40w,vere these predicates
framed? Ho\v did people conle to know of gods and
goddesses, heroes and nynlphs, and \vhat llleaning diù
they originally connect with these terms? In fact,
the real question which a philosophy of nlythology
has to answer is this - Is the whole of lnythology an
invention, the fanciful poetry of a Honler or Hesiod,
or is it a growth? Or, to speak Jnore definitely, Was
Inythology a nlere accident, or was it inevitable?
"\tVas it only a false step, or \vas it a step that could
not have been left out in tbe bistorical progress of
the human mind?
The study of the history of language, ,vhich is only
a part of the study of the history of thought, bas en-
abled us to give a decisiv.e answer to this question.
Mythology is inevitable, it is natural, it is an inher-
ent necessity of language, if we recognize in language
the outward form and manifestation of thought: it
is, in fact, the dark shado\v \vhich language throws
on thought, and \vhich can never disappear till lan-
guage becomes altogether COlnnlensnrate \vith thought,
which it never will. l\Iytbology, no doubt, breaks
out more fiercely during the early periods of the his-
tory of hlunan thought, but it never disappears alto-
gether. Depend upon it, there is Inythology now as
there 'vas in the tilne of Honler, only \ve do not per-
ceive it, because we ourselves live in the very shado\v
of it, and because we all shrink fronl the full meridian
light of truth. Weare ready enough to see that if
the ancients called their kings and heroes .lWYEJlEî
,
YOLo v. 5

66 ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY.

sprung of Zeus, that expression, intended originally
to convey the highest praise which man can bestow on
Ulan, ,vas apt to lapse into nlythology. 'Ve easily
perceive how such a conception, con1patible in its
origin with the highest reverence for the gods, led al-
11l0st inevitably to the growth of fables, \vhich trans-
ferred to divine beings the incidents of hUlllan pater-
n.ity and sonship. But we are not so ready to see
that it is our fate, too, to move in allegories which
illustrate things intellectual by visions exhibited to
the fancy. . In our religion, too, the conceptions of
paternity and sonship have not always òeen free frolll
all that is 11l1l11an, nor are ,ve ahvays aware that
nearly every note that belongs to human paternity
and sonship 111ust be taken out of these terms, before
they can be pronounced safe against mythological in-
fection. Papal decisions on Ï1nmaculate conception
are of no avail against that mythology. The mind
must become Ï1nn1aculate and rise superior to itself ;
or it must close its eyes and shut its lips in the pres-
ence of the Divine.
If then we \vant to understand mythology, in the
ordinary and restricted sense of the word, we Inust
discover the larger circle of Inental phenon1ena to
which it belongs. Greek mythology, is but a small
seglnent of 111ythology; the religious mythologies of
all the races of mankind are again but a small seg-
ment of mythology. 1\rIythology, in the highest sense,
is the power exercised by language on though t in
every possible sphere of nlental activity; and I do
not hesitate to call the whole history of philosophy,
fron1 Thales do,vn to Hegel, an uninterrupted battle
against nlythology, a constant protest of thought
against language. This will require some explana-
tion.

ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF l\IYTHOLOGY. 67

Ever since the time of 'Vi1hehn von Hunlboldt, an
who have seriously grappled with the highest prob-
lems of the Science of Language ha ve COllle to the
conviction that thought and language are insepara-
ble, that language is as Ï1npossible \vithout thought
as thought is without language; tbat they stand to
each other sOll1ewhat like soul and body, like po,ver
and function, like substance and forill. The objections
which have been raised against this view arise gener-
ally from a mere l11isunderstandillg. If we speak of
language as the olÜ,vard realization of thought, we do
not mean language as deposited ill a dictionary, or
sketched in a granllnar ; we nlean language as an act,
language as being spoken, language as living and dy-
ing with every word that is uttered. \Ve Inight per-
haps call this speech, as distinguished from language.
Secondly, though if \ve sp
ak of language, we
mean chiefly phonetic articulate language, \ve do not
exclude the less perfect sYlnhols of thought, such as
gestures, signs, or pictures. They, too, are language
in a certain sense, and they must be included in lan-
guage before we are justified in saying that discur-
sive thought can be realized in language only. One
instance \vill nlake this clear. 'Ve hold that we can-
not think without language. But can we not count
without langunge ? We certainly can. We can forn1
the concpption of three without any spoken \vord, by
sinlply holding up three fingers. In the same nlan-
ner, the hand nlight stand for five, both hands for
.
ten, hands and feet for twenty.l r.rhis is ho\v people
who possessed no organs of speech \VOU 1<.1 speak; this
is ho\v the deaf and dUln b do speak. Three fingers

1 Daily Life and OJ'igin of the Tasmanians, by J. Bonwick, 1870,
p.143.

68 ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY.

are as good as three strokes, three strokes are as good
as three clicks of the tongue, three clicks of the
tongue are as good as the sound three, or trois, or
drei, or shalosh in Hebrew, or san in Chinese. All
these are signs, more or less perfect, but being signs,
they fall under the category of language; and all \ve
maintain is, that without SaIne kind of sign, discur-
sive thought is impossible, and that in that sense,
language, or Àóyoç, is the only possible realization of
hlunan thought.
Another very common misunderstanding is this:
people iU1agine that, if it be inlpossible to think, ex-
cept in language, language and thought n1l1st be one
a
d the saIne thing. But a true philosophy of lan-
ghage leads to the very opposite result. Every phi-
losopher would say tbat matter cannot exist \vithout
form, nor fornl without Blatter, but no philosopher
would say that therefore it is impossible to distin-
guish between forlll and lllatter. In the saIne .\vay,
though we Inailltain that thought cannot exist \vith-
out language nor language \vithout thought, we do
distinguish between thought and language, between
the in \vard and the outward Àóyoç, bet\veen the sub-
stance and the form. Nay, \ve go a step beyond. 'Ve
admit that language necessarily reacts on thought,
and we see in this reaction, in this refraction of the
rays of language, the real solution of the old riddle
of nlythology.
You will now see ,vhy these some\vhat abstruse dis-
quisitions were necessary for our ilnlnediate purpose,
and I can promise those \vho have hitherto followed
me on this rather barren and rugged track, that they
will now be able to rest, and c0111mand, fronl the
point of view \vhich \ve have reached, the \vhole pano-
rama of the mythology of the hunlan olind. .

ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY. 69

'Ve saw just now that the names of numbers may
most easily be replaced by signs. N u1l1bers are siln-
pIe analytical conceptions, and for that very reason
they are not liable to lllythology: BaIne and concep-
tion being here commensurate, no misunderstanding
is possible. But as soon as we leave this department
of thought, mythology begins. I shall try by at least
one exanlple to show ho,v mythology not only per-
vades the sphere of religion or religious tradition, but
infects more or less the whole realm of thought.
When man wished for the first time to grasp and
express a distinction between the body and some-
thing else within him distinct from the body, an easy
name that suggested itself was breath. The brea.th
seemed s01l1ething imll1aterial and almost invisible,
and it was connected with the life that pervaded the
body, for as soon as the breath ceased, the life of the
body becanle extinct. Hence the Greek nallle .pvX
,l

1 The word IþV}( is clearly connected in Greek with IþÚ}(W, which meant
originally blowing, and was used either in the sense of cooling by blowing,
or breathing by blowing. In the former acceptation it produced IþÚ}(OÇ,
coldness; IþV}(PÓÇ, cold; Iþv}(áw, I cool; in the latter IþV}(
, breath, then life,
then soul. So far the purely Greek growth of words derived from IþÚ}(W is
clear. But Iþúxw itself is difficult. It seems to point to a root spu, meaning
to blowout, to spit; Lat. spuo, and Spll1ma" foam; Goth. speivan ; Gr.
7rTVW, supposed to stand for u1Tdiw. Hesychius mentions IþVTTEL = 7rTúet,
Iþvrróv = 1TTVfÀOV. (Pott, Etym. Forsch. No. 355.) Curtins connects this
root with Gr. if>v, in <þûua, blowing, bellows, if>vuá.w, to blow, if>VULá.W, to
snort, 1ToHpvuuw, to blow, and with Lat. spirare (i. e. spoisare). See E. B.
Tylor, " The Religion of Savages," Fortnightly Review, 1866, p. 13.
Stahl, who rejected the division of life and mind adopted by Bacon, and
returned to the Aristotelian doctrine, falls back on Plato's etymology of
IþV}( as cþvul}(1}, from <þvuw ÉxeLv or ò}(fîv, C1.at. 400 B. In a passage of his
Theoria JIedica Vera (Halæ, 1708), pointed out to me by Dr. Rolleston,
Stahl says: "Invenio in lexico græco antiqurore post alios, et Budæum
imprimis, iterum iterumque reviso, nomenclaturam nimis quam fugitive
allegåtam; cþVUf.}(1}, poetke, pro Iþvx
. Incidit animo suspicari, an non
Yerun primum nomen animæ antiquissimis Græcis fuerit hoc cþvuÉ}(1}, quasi
Ë}(WV TÒ cþveLv, e cuius vocis pronunciatione deflectente, uti vere familiariter
solet vocalium, inprimis sub accentibus, fugitiva enunciatione, sensim

70 ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF :MYTHOLOGY.

which originally n1eant breath, \vas chosen to express
at first the principle of life, as distinguished from the
decaying body, after\vards the incorporeal, the imn1a-
terial, the undecaying, the immortal part. of Inal1-
his soul, his lllind, his Self. All this was very nat-
ural. When a person dies, we too say that he has
given np the ghost, and ghost, too, meant originally
spirit, and spirit llleant breatb.
A very instructive analogous case is quoted by Mr.
E. B. Tylor fron1 a compendium of the theology of
the Indians of Nicaragua, the record of question and
answer in an inquest held by Father Francisco de
Bobadilla in the early days of the Spanish conquest.
Asked, an1ông other things, concerning death, the In-
dians said: " Those \vho die in their houses go under-
ground, but those \vho are killed in \var go to serve
the gods (teotes). When men die, there comes forth
from their mouth something ,yhich reselllbles a per-
son, and is called iulio (Aztec yuli, , to live '). This
being is like a person, but does not die, and the corpse
remains here." The Spanish ecclesiastics inquired
whether those who go on high keep the saIne body,
features, and limbs as here below; to ,vhich the In-
dians answered, "No, there is only the heart."
" But," said the Spaniards, "as the hearts are torn
out" (they lneant in the case of warriors \vho fell
into the hands of the eneIny), " what happens then? "
Hereupon the Indians replied: "It is not precisely
the heart, but that which is in them, and makes thern

natum sit rþvCT-x rþCTvx
, denique ad faci1iorem pronuncialionem ill locum
fþCTvx
, 1þvx
. Quam suspicionem fovere mihi videtur illud, quod vocabuli
1þvx
S", pro anima, nulla idonea analogia in lingua græca occurrat; nam
quæ a 1þüxw ducitur, cum verus huius et directus significatus notorie sit
refrigero, indirectus autem magis, spiro, nihil certe hæc ad animam puto."
(P.44.)

ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY. 71

live, and which quits the body when they die;" and
again they said, "It is not their heart ,vhich goes up
on high, but that \vhich Inakes them live, that is, the
breath coming out from their nlouth, ,vhich is called
:julio." "Then," asked the Spaniards, "does this
heart, :julio, or soul, die ,vith the body?" "When
the deceased has lived ,veIl," replied the Indians,
"the :julio goes up on high with our gods; but when
he has lived ill, the :julio perishes with the body, and
there is an end of it."
The Greeks expressed the same idea by sayi;1g that
the tþvx had left the body,l had fled through the
mouth, or even through a bleeding \vound,2 and had
gone into Hades, which meant literally no more than
the place of the Invisible ('At8YJ';). That the breath
had become invisible was 111atter of fact; that it had
gone to the house of Hades, was mythology springing
spontaneously fron1 the fertile soil of language.
The primitive mythology was by no lneans nec-
essarily religious. In the very case ,vhich \ve have
chosen, philosophical lnythology sprang up by the
side of religious Inythology. The religious Inythol.
ogy consisted in speaking of the spirits of the de-
parted as ghosts, as mere breath and air, as fluttering
about the gates of Hades, or ferried across the Styx
in the boat of Charon. 3

1 åvôpòç5è 1þvx 7ráÀLV ÉÀe ELV OV'TEV ÀEiuT1],
ovO' ÈÀETYz, É7rEì. lìp ICEI' åP.Eí1þETaL ËpK.Oç ÒÔÓVTWV.
. Il. ix. 408.
2 oLà Ô' ËVTEpa xaÀlCÒÇ lìrþVUO'EV
ônwuaç . 1þvxYz ôÈ lCaT' oVTap.ÉVY}l' W'TELÀYzII

ËUUVT' É7rELyoP.ÉvYJ.

Il. xiv. 517.
8 "Ter frnstra compressa manu effugit imago,
Par levibus ventis volucrique simillima somno."
Virgo Æn. ii. 792.

72 ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY.

The philosophical mythology, however, that sprang
frolll this name was nluch more important. We saw
that Psyche, 111eaning originally the breathing of the
body, was gradually used in the sense of vital breath,
and as something independent of the body; and that
at last, when it had assl1lned the llleaning of the im-
lnortal part of man, it retained that character of
sOlnething independent of the body, thus giving rise
to the conception of a soul, not only as a being with-
out a body, but in its very nature opposed to body.
As SOOÌl as that opposition had been established in
language and thought, philosophy began its work in
order to explain ho,v two such heterogeneous powers
could act on each other - ho,v the soul could influ-
ence the body, and how the body could deternline
the soul. Spiritualistic and 111aterialistic systmns of
philosophy arose, and all this in order to remove a
self-created difficulty, in order to join together again
what language bad severed, the living body and the
living soul. The question ,vhether there is a soul or
spirit, whether there is in man something different
from the mere body, is not at all affected by this
mythological phraseology. "\Ve certainly can distin-
guish between body aud soul, but as long as we keep
within the linlits of human knowledge, ,ve have no
right to speak of the living soul as a breath, or of
spirits and ghosts as fluttering about like birds or
fairies. The poet of the nineteenth century says: -
" The spirit does but mean the breath,
I know no more."

And the san1e thought was expressed by Cicero two
thousand years ago: ,,"Thether the soul is air or fire,
I do not know." As 111 en, ,ve only know of em-
bodied spirits, however ethereal their bodies may be

ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF l\IYTHOLOGY. 73

conceived to be, but of spirits, separate froln body,
without forln or fr
ul1e, we know as little as we know
of thought without language, or of the Dawn as a
goddess, or of the Kight as the 1110ther of the Day.
Though breath, or spirit, or ghost are tlle nlost
common nan1es tbat were assigned through the 1neta-
phorical nature of language to the vital, and after-
,vards to the intellectual, principle in nlan, they ,vere
by no nleans the only possible nalnes. 'Ve speak,
for instance, of the slulde8 of the dpparted, which
l11eant originally their shadows. Those who first in-
troduced this expression - and ,ve find it in the
J110St distant parts of the world 1_ evidently took the
shadow as the nearest approach to ,vhat they wished
to express; sOll1ething that shoulll be incorporeal,
yet closely connected with the body. The Greek

lòwÀov, too, is not much 1110re than the shadow,
while the Latin 'n
ane8 meant probably in the bf'gin-
ning no more than the Little Ones, the Slnall Folk. 2
But the curious part, as showing again the influeuce
of language on thought, an influence more powerful
even than the evidence of the senses, is this, that
people ,,,bo speak of the life or soul as the shado,v of
the body, have brought themselves to believe that a
dead body casts no shadow, because the shado\y has
departed from it; that it becomes, in fact, a kind of
Peter Schlemihl. 3
Let us now return to n1ythology in the narrower
sense of the word. One of the earliest objects that

1 See E. B. Tylor, Fortnightly Review, 1860, p. 74.
2 Im-manis, originally "not small, JJ came to mean enormous or mon-
strous. See Pre11er, Riimisc/te Jf.1JtllOlogie, p. 72 seq.
8 Unkulunkulu; or the T,'adition of Creation as existing among the
Amazulu and othu. T'l'ibes of South Afi.ica, by the Rev. J. Callaway, 1\1.
D.
ata], 18()8. Part I. p. 91.

74 ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY.

,vould strike and stir the 11lind of man, and for \vhich
a sign or a name \vould soon be wanted, is surely the
Sun. It is very hard for us to realize the feelings
with which the first d\vellers on the earth looked
upon the sun, or to understand fully ,vhat they
meant by a lllorning prayer, or a morning sacrifice.
Perhaps there are few people here present \vho have
watched a sunrise more than once or twice in their
lives; few people who have ever known the true
111eaning of a lllorning prayer, or a morning sacrifice.
But think of man at the very dawn of tin1e: forget
for a l1l0ment, if you can, after having read the fasci-
nating pages of 1\fr. Darwin, forget ,vhat luan is sup-
posed to have been before he was nlan; forget it, be-
cause it does not concern us here whether his bodily
form and fraille ,vere developed once for all in the
mind of a Creator, or gradually in the creation itself,
which from the first monad or protopIaSll1 to the last
of the primates, or nlan, is not, I suppose, to be
looked on as altogether causeless, llleaningiess, pur-
poseless; think of him only as man (and Inan nleans
the thinker), \vith his mind yet lying fallow, though
full of germs - germs of which I hold as strongly as
ever no trace has ever, no trace will ever, be dis-
covered anywhere but in nlan; think of the Sun
awakening the eyes of man fronl sleep, and his mind
from slumber ! Was not the Sunrise to him the
first wonder, the first beginning of all reflection, all
thought, aU philosophy? ,vas it not to him the first
revelation, the first beginning of all trust, of all re-
ligion? To us that \vonder of wonders has ceased to
exist, and few men now would even venture to speak
of the sun as Sir John Herschel has spoken, calling
him "the Ahnoncr of the Aln1ighty, the delegated

ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY. 75

dispenser to us of light and warn1th, as well as the
centre of attraction, and as such, the immediate
source of all our con1forts, and, indeed, of the very
possibility of our existence on earth." 1

Ian is a creature of habit, and wherever \ve can
,vatch him, we find that before a fe,v generations
have passed he has lost the power of admiring ,vhat
is regular, and that he can see signs and ,vonders
only in what is irregular. Few nations only bave
preserved in their ancient poetry some remnants of
the natural awe with which the earliest dwellers on
the earth saw that brilliant being slo,vly rising from
out the darkness of the night, raising itself by its
o\vn might higher and higher, tin it stood trium-
phant on the arch of heaven, and then descended and
sank down in its fiery glory into the dark abyss of
the heaving and hissing sea. In the hymns of the
Veda the poet still wonders \vhetber the sun will rise
again; he asks bo,v be can climb the vault of heaven?
why he does not fall back? ,vhy there is no dust on
his path? And when the rays of the morning rouse
hÌln from sleep and call him back to new life; when
he sees the sun, as he says, stretching out his golden
arms to bless the world and rescne it from the terrors
of darkness, he exclaims, "Arise, our life, our spirit
has come back! the darkness is gone, the light ap-
proaches ! "
For so prominent an object in the prilneval pict-
ure-gallery of the hU111an n1ind, a sign or a name
must have been ,vanted at a very early period. But
how was this to be achieved? As a Inere sign, a
circle would have been sufficient, such as we find in

1 See J. Samuelson, Views of the Deity, Traditional and Scientffic, p.
144. 'Villiams & Norgate, 1871.

76 ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY.

the hieroglyphics of Egypt, in the graphic systeln of
China, or even in our own astronomical tables. If
such a sign was fixed upon, we have a beginning of
language in the ,videst sense of the word, for we have
brought the Sun under the general concept of rounù-
ness, and ,ve have found a sign for this concept ,vhich
is maòe up of a large number of single sensuous in1-
pressions. 'Vith such definite signs n1ythology has
little chance; yet the mere fact that the Slln was
represented as a circle ,vould favor the idea that the
sun was round; or, as ancient people, who had no
adjective as yet for round or rotundU8,1 would say,
that the sun ,vas a wheel, a rota. If, on the con-
trary, the round sign ren1Ïnded the people of an eye,
then the sign of the sun ,vould soon become the eye
of heaven, and gerlns of mythology would spring up
even froln the barren soil of such hieroglyphic lan-
guage.
But no,v, suppose that a real name was wanted
for the sun, how could tbat be achieved?
"\tVe know that all words are deriv(
d frorl} roots,
that these roots express general concepts, and that,
with fe,v exceptions, every nal11e is founded on a
general concept under which the object that has to
be named can be ranged. How these roots came to
be, is a question into \vhich we need not enter at
1 "It has already been implied that the Aborigines of Tasmania had
acquired very limited powers of abstraction or generalization. They pos-
ses8ed no words representing abstract ideas; for each variety of gum-tree
and wattle-tree, etc., etc., they had a name, but they ha(l no equivalent
for the expression, 'a tree; , neither could they express abstract qualities,
such as hard, soft, warm, cold., lon
, short, round., etc.; for 'hard' they
would say 'like a stone;' for 'tall' they would say 'long leg;,,' etc.; for
'round' they said 'like a ball,' 'like the moon,' anù so on, usual1y suiting
the action to the word, and contìrming l>y some
ign the meaning to be
Imderstood." Milligan, Vocabula1.Y qf the Dialects of some of the Ab-
o1iginal Tribes of Tasmania, p. 34. Hobart Town, 1866.

ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY. 77

present. Their origin and gro,vth fornl a problem of
psychology rather than of philology, and each science
must keep within its proper bounds. If a name ,vas
wanted for snow, the early franlers of language sin-
gled out one of the general predicates of snow, its
whiteness, its coldness, or its liq l1idity, and called the
snow the white, the cold, or the liquid, by means of
roots conveying the general idea of ,vhiteness, cold-
ness, or liquidity. Not only Nix, nivis, but Niobe 1
too, was a nanle of the sno\v, and meant the nlelting;
the death of her beautiful children by the arrows of
Apollon and Arten1Ïs represents the destruction of
winter by the rays of tbe sun. If the sun itself ,vas
to be nanled, it might be called the brilliant, the
awakener, the runner, the ruler, the father, the giver
of warn1th, of fertility, of life, the scorcher, the òe-
stroyer, the Inessenger of death, and Inal1Y other
names; but there \vas no possibility of nanling it,

1 If Signor Asco1i blames me for deriving Niobe with other names for
snow from the root snu, instead of from the root sni,qll, this can only be
due to an oversight. I am responsible for the derivation of Niobe, anà
for the admission of a secondary root snyu or nyu, and so far I may he
either right or wrong. But Sig-nor Ascoli ought to have known that the
derivation of Gothic snáiv-s, Old High-German snêo, or snê, gen. snêwe-s,
Lithuanian snéga-s, Slav. snJeg, Rib. sneachd, from the root snu, rest on
the authority of Bopp (Glossa'l'ium, 184-7, s. v. snu; see also Grimm,
Deutsche Grammntik, ii. p. 700). He ought likewise to haye known that
in 1852 Professor Schweizer-Siedler, in his review of Biitticher's .LÍ1.ica
(Kuhn's Zeitschrift, i. p. 479), had pointed out that snigh may be consill-
ered as a secondary root by the side of snu and snâ (cf. up..áw, up..
x.w; Iþaw,
öfiÝJx.w; váw, vÝJx.w). The real relation of snu to snigh had heen explained as
early as 184-2 by Benfe}', TVul.Ztllexicvn, ii. p. 54; and Signor Ascoli was
no ùoubt aware of what Professor Curti us had written on the relation of
snigh to snu (Grundzü.fIe der GrÏt:chischen Etymolo,qie, p. 2!)7). Signor
A
coli has certainly shown with gr('ater minuteness than his predec('ssors
that not only Zend snizh and Lithuanian snpgrt-s, but likewise Gothic
snaÍl:-s, Greek vicþf!L, Latin nix, niv-is, and ninguis, may he derived from
snigh; but if from snigh, a secondary development of the root snu, we can
arrive at vilþ-a, and at vi,Ja, the other steps that lead on to Niobe will re-
main just the same.

78 ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY.

except by laying hold of one of its characteristic
features, and expressing that feature by llleaus of
one of the conceptual or predicative roots.
Let us trace the history of at least one of these
names. Before the Aryan nations separated, before
there was a Latin, a Greek, or a Sanskrit language,
there existed a root 8var or 8val, which Ineaut to
beanl, to glitter, to ,varIn. It exists in Greek, uf.Àa<;,
splendor; Uf.À
J'YJ, moon; in Anglo-Saxon, as 8wélan,
to burn, to s,veal; in modern German, 8chwül, op-
pressively hot. From it we ha.ve in Sanskrit the
noun 8var, Ineaning sometimes the_ sky, sOllletillles
the sun; and exactly the saIne word has been pre-
served in I..Jatin, as 80l; in Gothic as 8auil
. in An-
glo-Saxon, as 80l. A secondary form of svar is the
Sanskrit 8úrya for svârya, the suu, \vhich is the same
word as the Greek
Àwç.
All these names \vere originally lllere predicates;
they meant bright, brilliant, warm. But as soon as
the name 8var or 8ûrya ,vas formed, it became, through
the irresistible influence of language, the name, not
only of a living, but of a nlale being. Every noun in
Sanskrit Blust be either a masculine or a felninine
(for the neuter gender ,vas original1y confined to the
nominative case), and as 8ûryas had been forilled as
a måsculine, language stanl ped it once for aU as the
sign of a I11ale being, as nluch as if it had been the
nan1e of a warrior or a king. In other languRges
,vhere the nall1e for sun is a fenlinine, and the sun is
accordingly conceived as a \voman, as a queen, as the
bride of the llloon, the whole nlythology of the love-
making of the heavenly bodies is changed.
You may say that aU this shows, not so much t.he
influence of langnage on thought, as of thought 011

ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY. 79

language; and that the sexual character of all words
reflects only the peculiaritie of a child's nlind, which
can conceive of nothing except as living, as male or
felüale. If a child hurts itself against a chair, it
beats and scolds the chair. The chair is looked upon
not as it, but as he; it is the naughty chair, quite
as rnuch as a boy is a naughty boy. There is SOllle
truth in this, but it only serves to confirln the right
view of the influence of language on thought; for
this tendency, though in its origin intentional, and
therefore the result of thought, became soon a mere
rule of tradition in language, and it then reacted on
the mind with irresistible po\ver. As soon, in fact,
as 8ûryas or
Àwç appears as a Inasculine, we are in
the very thick of nlythology. We have not yet ar-
rived at Helios as a god - that is a lnuch later stage
of thought, \vhich \ve Inight describe ahnost in the
\vords of Plato at the beginning of the seventh book
of the "Republic," "And after this, he \vill reason
that tbe SUll is he \vho gives the seasons and t11e years,
and is tþe guardian of all that is in the visible \vorld,
and in a certain way the cause of all things which
he and his fello\vs have been accustomed to behold."
We have not yet advanced so far, but we have
reached at least the first gernls of a nlyth. In the
Honleric hyn111 to Helios, IIelios is not yet caned an
immortal, but only f.7rLEíKEÀOÇ ã8aváToLCTL, like unto iln-
111ortals, yet he is called the child of Euryphaessa, the
son of IIyperion, the grandson of Uranos and Gæa. 1
1 At the end of the hymn the poet says: -
Xa.lPE, líva
, 7TPÓ<þPWV 8È ßiov eVI.U1PE' Õ1l"a
E.
ÈK uÉo 8' åp
áfLEVOÇ KÀ?1UW fLEPÓ1I"WV yÉvoç åv8pwv
'ÌJfLLÐÉwv, WI' Ëpya ÐEOì. (lVllTOlULV ËOEl
av.
This would seem to imply that the poet looked upon Uelios as a half-god,
almost as a hero, who had once lived on earth.

80 ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY.

All this is nlythology; it is ancient language go-
ing beyond its first intention.
Nor is there much difficulty in interpreting this
n1yth. IIelios, the sun, is called the son of Hyperïon,
sOllletiu1es Hyperïon hiulself. This llanle I-Iyperïon
is derived from tbe preposition {)7rfP, the Latin super,
,vhich llleans above. It is derived by 11leans of the
suffix -LOW, which originally was not a patronynlic, but
sinlply expressed belonging to. So if Helios was
called IIyperion, this siulply Ineant he who d\vells
on high, and corresponds to Latin SU7Junanus or
Superior, or Excelsior. If, on the contrary, Ilelios
is called IIyperiol1ides, this, too, which meant origi-
nally no more than he ,vho COIlles froln, or belongs
to those who dwell on high,l led to the ulyth that he
,vas the descendant of IIyperion; so that in this case,
as in the case of Zeus K.ronïon, the son reaUy led to
the conception of his father. Zeus J{ronïon l1lpant
origil1al1y no lllore than Zeus the eternal, the god of
ages, the ancient of days; but -íwv becoming usual as
a patrol1yn1Ïc suffix, J{ronion ,vas supposed to Inean
the son of }{ronos. I{ronos, the father, 'vas created
in order to account for the existence of the name
Kronion. If IIyperïon is called the son of Eury-
pllaessa, the ,vide-shining, this requires no comrnen-
tary; for even at present a poet Inight say that the
sun is born of the ,vide-shining dawn. You see the
spontaneous generation of I1lythology ,vith every new
nall1e that is fonned. As not only the snn, but also
the 11100n and the dawn could be called d,vellers on
high, they, too, took the na.me of IIyperionis or
Hyperionides; and hence Honler called Selene, the
Moon, and Eos, the Da,vn, sisters of Helios, and

1 Corssen, UtbeJ. Steigcrungsendungen, Kuhn's Zeitsclt7'ift, iii. p. 299.

ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY. 81

daughters of Hyperioll and Euryphaessa, the Dawn
doing service twice, both as n10ther, Euryphaessa,
and as daughter, Eos. Nay, according to Homer,
Euryphaessa, the Dawn, is not on ly the wife, but
also the sister of He1ios. All tbis is perfectly intel-
ligible, if we watch the growth of language and my-
thology; but it leads, of course, to the most tragic
catastrophes as soon as it is all taken in a literal
sense.
Helios is called àKáp.ac;, the never-tiring; 7raJlÖf:pK

,
the all-seeing; rþaiewJI, the shining; and also cþ()îßo
,
the brilliant. This last epithet cþoZßo has gr(HVn into
an independent deity Phæbus, and it is particularly
kno,vn as a naiTIe of Apollon, Phoibos Apollon; thus
showing what is also kno,vn from other source.s, that
in Apollo, too, we have one of the nutny n1ytbic dis-
guises of the SUllo
So far all is clear, because all the nal11es which we
have to deal with are intelligible, or, at all events,
yield to the softest etY111010gical pressure. But no\v if
we hear the story of Phoibos Apollon falling in love
with Daphne, and Daphne praying to her n10ther, the
Earth, to save her fron1 Phoibos; and if \ve read ho,v
either the earth received her in her lap, and then a
laurel tree sprang up where she had disappeared, or
how she herself was changed into a laurel tree, what
shall we think of this? It is a lnere story, it n1ight
be said, and why should there be any l11eaning in it ?
1\Iy answer is, because people do not tell such stories
of their gods and heroes, unless there is son1e sense in
them. Besides, if Phoibos means the sun, \vhy
should not Daphne have a n1eaning too? Before,
therefore, \ve can decide whether the story of Phoibos
and Daphne is a mere invention, ,ve nUlst try to find
VOL. v. 6

82 ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF l\IYTHOLOG Y.

out what can have been the 111eaning of the word
Daphne.
In Greek it n1
ans a laurel,! and this would explain
the purely Greek legend that Daphne was changed
into a laurel tree. But who was Daphne? In order
to ans\ver this quest.ion, we 111USt have recourse to
etymology, or, in other words, we n1ust examine the
history of the word. Etymology, as you know, is no
longer wllat it used to be; and though there may still
be a classical scholar here and there 'vho crosses him-
self at the idea of a Greek word being eXplained by a
reference to Sanskrit, we naturally look to Sanskrit
as the master-key to l11any a lock which no (j-reek key
will open. Now Daphne, as I have shown, can be
traced back to Sanskrit A h a n â, and A h a n
in San-
skrit means the da,vn. As soon as ,ve kno\v this,
everything becomes clear. The story of Phoibos and
Daphne is no 11101'e than a description of what every
one lTIay see every day; first, the appearence of the
Dawn in the eastern sky, then tbe rising of the Sun
as if hurrying after his bride, then the gradual fading
away of the bright Da,vl1 at the touch of the fiery
rays of the sun, and at last her death or disappearance
in the lap of her 1110ther, the Earth. All this seen1S
to me as clear as daylight, and the only objection
that could be raised against this reading of the an-
cient myth would be, if it could be proved, that
A h an â, does not 111ean Dawn, and that Daphne can-
. not be traced back to A h an:1, or that Helio8 does
not nlean the Sun.
I know there is another objection, but it seems to
me so groundless as hardly to deserve an answer.
Why, it is asked, should the ancient nations have told
1 See Selected Essays, vol. Í. p. 399.

ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY. 83

th<:se endless stories about the Sun and the Dawn,
and why should they have preserved them in their
n1ythology? 'Ve JYllght as well ask why the ancient
nations should have invented so nlany irregular verbs,
and why they should have preserved thel11 in their
gramnlar. A fact does not cease to be a fact, because
we cannot at once explain it. As far as our knowl-
edge goes at present, we are justified in stating that
the Aryan nations preserved not only their granllnat.
ical structure, and a large portion of their dictionary,
from the time which preceded their separation, but
that they like,vise retained the l1an1eS of some of their
deities, SOlne legends about their gods, SOlne popular
sayings and proverbs, and in these, it Juay be, the
seeds of parables, as part of their COllln1on Aryan
heirloon1. Their n1ythological lore fills, in fact, a
period in the history of Aryan thought, half-\vay
bet,veel1 the period of language and the period of
literature, and it is this discovery which gives to 111Y-
thology its inlportance in the eyes of the student of
the 1110St ancient history and psychology of man-
kind.
And do not suppose that the Greeks, or the Hin-
dus, or the Aryan nations in general, were the only
people who possessed such tales. \Vherever we look,
in every part of the world, among uncivilized as well
as a civilized people, we fiud the same kind of stories,
the san1e traditions, the same n1yths.
I shan give one story from the extr
me North,
another froln the extrelne South.
Among the Esq ui1I1aux of Repulse Bay, on the
west side of IIudson's Bay, on the Arctic Cil'cle,
1\ir. John Rae picked up the following story:-
"lVlany years ago, a great Esqllinlê:tux Conqueror

84 Ol{ THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY.

gained so 11lHCh power that he ,vas able to rise unto
the heavens, taking with hinl on one occasion a sister,
a very beautiful girl, and SOlne fire. He added n1llCh
fuel to the fire, and thus formed the Sun. For SOUle
time he and his sister lived in great bannony, but
after a till1e he became very cruel, and ill-treated his
sister in many ways. She bore it at first ,vith great
patience, until at last he thre,v fire at LeI', and
scorched 011e side of her face. This spoiling of her
beauty ,vas beyond endurance; she therefore ran
a\vay froll1 hin1, and forn1ed the
10on. IIer brother
then began, and still continues to chase her; but al-
though he sOlnetimes got near, he has not yet over-
taken her, nor ever ,vill.
" vVhen it is New
ioon, the burnt side of the face
is towards us ; at Fulll\1 oon it is the reverse."
There are dialectic varieties in the
Iythology of
the Esqlliulaux as of the Greeks and Hindus, and,
,vith a. change of gender bet,veen Sun and 1\loon, the
same story occurs anlong other tribes in the follo\v-
ing form:-
"There was a girl at a. party, and SOI11e one told
his love for her by shaking her shoulders, after the.
manner of the country. She could not see who it
was in the da.rk hut, so she smeared her hands \vith
soot, and \vhen he came back she blackened his
cheek ,vith her hand. 'Vhen a light was brought
she sa,v that it 'vas her brother and fled. He ran
after her, follo,ved her, and as she caIne to the end
of the earth, he sprang out into the sky. Then she
became the sun, and he the Inoon, and this is ,vhy
the llloon is always chasing the sun through the
heavens, and ,vhy the Inoon is sOlnetinles dark as he
turns his blackened cheek to\vards the earth." 1
1 The Cltilrlhuod o.fthe TVorld, by E. Clodd, p. 62.

ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY.
Õ

\Ve no,v turn to the South, and here, a.lllong the
lowest of the low, alllong the Hottentots, ,vho are
despised even by their black neighbors, the Zulus,
we find the following gelll of a fable, beaming ,vith
ll1ingleJ rays of religion and philosophy: -
" The .1\1oon, it is said, sent once an inspct to men,
saying, "Go thou to lllen, and tell them, As I die,
and dying live, so ye shall also die, and dying live."
The insect started ,vith the message, but ,vhilst on
his way was overtaken by the hare, ,vho asked:
"On wbat errrand art thou bound?" The insect
answered, "I am sent by the 1\10011 to men, to tell
them that as she dies and dying lives, they also shall
die and dying live." The hare saiJ, "As thou art
an a,vkward runner, let me go" (to take the ll1eS-
sage). 'V ith these ,vords he ran off, and when he
reached men, he said, "I am sent by the :\loon to
tell you, As I die, and dying perish, in the same
manner ye also shall die and conle wholly to an enJ."
Then the bare returned to the l\Ioon, and told her
what he had said to Ine11. The 1\1:oon reproached
IÚnl angrily, saying,
'Darest thou tell the people a
thing ,vhich I have not said?" 'Vith these words
she took up a piece of wood, and struck hinl on the
nose. Since that day the hare's nose is slit."
Of this story, too, there are various versions and
in one of then1 the end is as follo\vs : -
"The hare, having rèturned to the l\Ioon, was
questioned as to the message delivered, and the
l\Ioon, having heard the true state of the case, be-
caIne so enraged ,vith hÏ1n that she took up a hatchet
to split his head; falling short, however, of that, the
batchet fell upon the upper lip of the hare, and cut
it severely. Hence it is that we see tbe "ba.re-lip."

86 ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY.

The hare, being duly incensed at having received
sllch treatInent, raised his cla\vs, and scratched the
Moon's face; and the dark parts ,vhich ,ve no\v see
on the surface of the
1oon are the scars which she
received on that occasion." 1
The Finns, Lapps, and Esthonians do not seen} a
very poetical race, yet there is poetry even in their
smoky buts, poetry surrounded ,vith all tbe splen-
dor of an arctic night, and fragrant with the per-
fume of 1110SS and \vild flo.wers. Here is one of their
legends: -
" Wanna Issi had two servants, I{oit and Äm-
marik, and he gave thelTI a torch which I{oit should
light every 1110rning, and Änlll1<tl'ik should extinguish
in the evening. III orùf>r to re\vard their faithful
services, 'Vanna. Issi to1L1 the In they nlight be nlan
and wife, but tbey asked 'Vanna Issi that be \voult1
allow then1 to rell1ain forever bride and bridegroonl.
\Vanna Issi assented, anù henceforth l{oit handed
the torch every even ing to Älnmarik, and Älnmarik
took it and extinguished it. Only during four
weeks in SUlllmer they relnain together at n1idnight ;

1 Reynard the Fox in South Aji.ica, or Hoftentot Fables and Tales, by
'V. H. I. Bleek, 1864, p. Gf}. Dr. Theophilus Hahn, Die Spl"ache del'
Nama, 1870, p. 5f}. As a curious coincidence, it may be mentioned that in
Sanskrit, too, the 1\1oon is calIed sa s ñ n k a, i. e. "Inn-ing the marks of a
hare," the black marks in the moon being taken for the Jikeness of the
hare. Another coincidence is that the N amaqua Hottentots will not tOUl
h
hare's flesh (see Sir James E. Alexander's Expedition of Discovery into
the Inte'Jior of Africa, vol. i. p. 268), because the hare deceived men,
while the Jews abstain from it, because the hare is supposed to chew the
cud (Lev. xi. G).
A similar tradition on the meanmg of death occurs among the Zulus,
but as they do not know of the 1\Ioon as a deity, the message that men are
not to die, or that they are to die, is sent there by Ullkulunkulu, the an-
C'estor of the human race, and thus the whole story loses its point. See Dr.
Callaway, Unkulunkulu, p. 4; and Gray, Pulgnesian .JIythology, pp. 16-
58.

ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY. 87

Koit hands the dying torch to Älnnutrik, but Ä1l1-
lllarik does not let it die, but lights it again with her
breath. Then their hands are stretched out, and
their lips 11leet, and the blush of the face of Älnlnarik
colors the n1idnight sky."
This myth requires hardly any cOlnlnentary; yet
as long as it is inlpossible to expla.in the nanles,
Wanna Issi, I{oit, and Äuunarik, it 111ight be said
that the story ,vas but a love story, invented by an
idle Lapp, or Finn, or Esthonian. But ,vhat if vVanna
Issi in Esthonian means the Old :Father, and if !(oit
111eans the Dawn? Can ,,"e then doubt any longer
that Äm lnarik 1 n1ust be the Gloaming and tha.t
their Ineeting in the sumU1er reflects those sumn1er
evenings when, particularly in the North, the torch
of the sun seenlS never to die, and ,vhen the Gloanl-
ing is seen kissing the Da.wn?
I wish I could tell you son1e more of these stories
which have been gathered frOIn all parts of the world,
and ,vhich, though they lllay be pronounced childish
and tedious by some critics, seen1 to llle to glitter
with the brightest de,v of nature's o,vn poetry, and
to contain those very touches that make us feel akin,
not only with Homer or Shakespeare, but even ,vitb
Lapps, and Finns, and l{affirs.
I cannot resist, however, the tell1ptation of insert-
ing here a. poetical rendering of the story of l{oit
and Ämmarik, sent to nle from the New 'V orld, re-

1 According to a letter just received from an Esthonian lady, ãmrnarik
does mean the gloaming in the language of the common people of Esthonia.
Bertram (Ilmatar, Dorpat, 1870, p. 2G5) remarks that Koit is the dawn,
Koidu täht, the morning-gtar, also called eha täht. Ä.marik, the ordinary
name for the dawn, is used as the name for the evcning twilight, or the
gloaming in the well-known story, published by Fählmann (V erhandlun-
yen der gelehrten Estnisclten Gescllsclwft zu Dorpat, vol. i.) In Finnish
hämãra is twilight in gcneral.

88 ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY.

marking only that instead of Lapland, Estbonia is
really the country that may claim the original story.

A LEGEND OF LAPLAND.

" Two sen
ants were in "\Vauna Issi's pay;
A blazing torch their care;
Each morning Koit must light it till its ray
Flam
d through the air;

" And every evening Ämmarik's fair hand
Must quench the waning light;
Then over all the weary, waiting land
:Fell the still night.

" So passed the time; then "\Vanna Issi said,
, For faithful service done,
Lo, here reward! To-morrow shall :re wed,
And so be one.'

" , Not so,' said Koit; 'for sweeter far to me
The joy that neareth still;
Then grant Uil ever fast betrothed to be.'
They had their will.

"And now the blazing lustre to transfer
Himself, is all his claim;
"\Varm from her lover's hand it comes to her,
To quench the flame.

" Only for four times seven lengthening days,
At midnight, do they stand
Together, while Koit gives the dying blaze
To Ämmarik's hand.

"0 wonder then! She lets it not expire,
But lights it with her breath-
The breath of love, that, warm with quickening fire,
Wakes life from death.

" Then hands stretch out, and touch, and clasp on high,
Then lip to lip is pressed,
And Ämmarik's blushes tinge the midnight sky
From east to west."

ANNA C. BRACKETT.

If people cannot bring tben1selves to believe in

ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY. 89

solar and celestial myths anlong the Hindus and
Greeks, let them study the folk-lore of the Sen1Ïtic
and Turanian races. I kno\v there is, on the part of
some of our most distinguished scholars, the saIne
objection against cornparing Aryan to non-Aryan
nlyths, as there is against any attelupt to explain
the features of Sanskrit or Greek by a reference to
Finnish or Bask. In one sense that objection is well
founded, for nothing would create greater confusion
than to ignore the genealogical principle as the only
safe one in a scientific classification of languages, uf
myths, and even of custonlS. We nlust first classify
our nlyths and legends, as we classify our languages
and dialects. 'Ve nUlst first of all endeavor to ex-
plain \vhat wants explanation in one melnber of a
family by a reference to other luenlbers of the saIne
family, before \ve allo\v ourselves to glance beyond.
But there is in a cOlnparative study of languages and
myths not only a philological, but also a philosophical,
and, more particularly, a psychological interest, and
though even in this nlore general study of mankind
the frontiers of language and race ought never to dis-
appear, yet they can no longer be allowed to narrow
or intercept our vie\v. How much the student of
Aryan mythology and ethnology 111ay gain for his
o\vn progress by allowing hinlself a \vider survey over
the traditions and cuSt0111S of the \vhole lUlinan race,
is best known to those who have studied the \vorks of
,
!{lenlnl, "\Vaitz, Bastian, Sir John Lubbock,
fr. rry_
lor, and Dr. Callavvay. "\Vhat is prehistoric in lan-
guage among the Aryan nations, is frequently found
as still historic among Turanian races. The sanle
applies \vith regard to religions, myths, legends, and
customs. Among Finns and Lapps, anlong Zulus

PO ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY.

and l\laoris, alnong I{honds and J{arens, we SOllle-
tiInes find the 1110St startling analogies to ...4.ryan tra-
ditions, and we certainly learn, again and again, this
one ÏInportant lesson, that as in language, so in
nlythology, there is nothing which Ilad not originally
a nleaning, that every nanle of the gods and heroes
had a beginning, a purpose, and a history.
Jupiter was no more cal1eJ Jupiter by accident,
than the Polynesian Maui, the Sanloyede Nilln, or the
Chinese Tien.I If we can discover the original mean-
ing of these nanIes, \ve have reached the first ground
of their later gro,vth. I do not say that, if ,ve ean
explain the first purpose of the Illythological nam
s,
,ve have solved the ,vhole riddle of mythology, but I
maintain that ,ve bave gained firnl ground. I main-
tain that every true etymology gives us an historical
fact, because the first giving of a nanle 'vas an l1Ïs-
torical fact, and an historical fact of the greatf'st im-
portance for the later developll1ent of ancient ideas.
Think only of this one fact, which no one ,yould no\v
venture to doubt, that the suprel11e deity of the
Greeks, the ROlllans, the Germans, is called by the
sanle name as the suprenle deity of the earliest .A.ryan
settlers ill India. Does not this one fact draw away
the curtain frolH the dark ages of antiquity, and open
before our eyes an horizon ,vhich we can hardly nleas-
ure by years? The Greek Zeus is the same word as
the Latin Jit in Jupiter, as the German TÚt ". and alJ
these ,vere merely dialectic varieties of the Vedic
Dyaus. 2 No\v dyaus in Sanskrit is the nêHne of the
sky, if used as a fen1Ïnine; if used as a masculine

1 See Lectures on the Science of Religion, pp. 194, 200.
2 See mv Lectures on the Science of Language (lOth ed.), voL ii. p
468.

ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY. 91

as it is still in the Veda, it is the sky as a man or as
a god - it is Zeus, the father of gods a:ud n1en. You
know, of course, that the whole language of ancient
India is but a sister dialect of Greek, Latin, of Ger-
nlan, J{eltic, and Slavonic, and that if the Greek says
es-ti, he is, if the Ronlan says est, the German ist, the
Slave yesté, the Hindu, three thousand years ago,
said as-ti, he is. rrhis as-a is a compound of a root
as, to be, and the pronoun t-i. The root n1eant origi-
nally to breathe, and dwindled down after a time to
the 111eaning of to be. All this must have happened
before a single Greek or German reached the shores
of Europe, and before a single Brahnlan descended
into the plains of India. At that distant tilne we
must place the gradual growth of language and ideas,
of a language ,vhich we are still speaking, of ideas
which we are still thinking; and at the same tinu
only can we explain the framing of those nanles
which were the first attelnpts at grasping snpernat-
ural powers, which becall1e in tilne the nanles of the
deities of the ancient world, t.he heroes of 111ythol-
ogy, the chief act.ors in many a legend, nay, SOIlH of
which have survived in the nursery tales of our own
time.!
l\Iy time, I see, is nearly over, but before I finish,
I feel that I have a duty to perforln fron1 which I
ought not to shrink. Some of those who have hon-
ored nle with their presence to-night Inay recollect
that about a year ago a lecture ,vas delivered in this
very room by Professor lllackie, in ,vhich he tried to
throw discredit on the scientific lnethod of the inter-
pretation of popular nlyths, or on ,vhat I call Com-

1 See a most interesting essay, Le Petit Poucet (Tom Thumb), by Gas-
ton Paris.

92 ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY.

parative Mythology. Had he confined his relnarks
to tIJe subject itself, I should have felt nlost grateful
for his criticisnls, little l11inding the nlanner in \vhich
they \vere conveyed - for a student of language
knows what words are Inade of. Nor, had his per-
sonal reflections concerned lHyself alone, should I have
felt called npon to reply to thell1 thus publicly, for it
has always seemed to me that unless \ve protest
against u111nerited praise, we have no right to protest
against unIl1erited abuse. I believe I can appeal to
all here present, that during the l11any years I have
had the honor to lecture in this Institution, I have
not once allowed myself to indulge in any personal
renlarks, or attacked those \vho, being absent, cannot
defend thenlselves. Even \vhen I had to ans\ver ob-
jections, or to refute fa.lse theories, I have ahvays
nlost carefully avoided nlentioning the nalnes of liv-
ing ,vriters. But as Professor Blackie has directed
his ral1dOnl blows, not against nlyse1f, but against a
friend of mine,
Ir. Cox, the author of a \vork on
Aryan l\Iythology, I feel that I ll1ust for once try
to get angry, anù return blo\v for blow. Professor
Blackie speaks of
Ir. Cox as if he had done nothing
beyond repeating what I had said before. Nothing
can be n10re unfair.
Iy own \vork ill" Comparative
l\Iythology has consisted chiefly in laying down some
of the general principles of that scipnce, and in the
etymological interpretation of SOllle of the ancient
n
ttnes of gods, goddesses, and heroes. In fact, I have
ll1ade it a rule never to interpret or to compare the
legends of India, Greece, Italy, or Germany, except
in cases where it 'vas possible, first of aU, to show an
identity or sin1ilarity in the Sanskrit, Greek, Latin,
or Gern1an nalnes of the principal actors. 1\1:1'. Cox

ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY. 93

having convinced himself that the method which I
have followed in mythology rests on sound and truly
scientific principles, has adopted n10st, though by no
means all, of n1 y etynlological interpretations. Pro-
fessor Blackie, on the contrary, without attell1ptillg
any explanation of the identity of 111ythological nan1es
in Greek and Sanskrit which must be either disproved
or eXplained, thunders forth the following sentence
of condenlnation: "Even under the scientific guid-
ance of a Bopp, a Bott, a Grimn1, and a l\Iüller, a
sober Inan n1ay sometinles, even in the full blaze of
the ne\y sun of cOlnparative philology, allow binlself
to drink deep draughts, if not of 1naundering 1nadness,
at least of manifest.hallucination."
If such ,vords are thro,vn at my head, I pick them
up chiefly as etymological curiosities, and as striking
illustrations of what l\1r. Tylor calls "survivals in
culture," sho\ving how the most prilnitive implements
of warfare, rude stones and unpolished flints, \vhich
an ethnologist would suppose to be confined to pre-
historic races, to the red Indians of America or the
wild Picts of Caledonia, turn up again most unex-
pectedly at the present day in the very centre of civ-
ilized life. All I can say is, that if, as a student of
Comparati ve l\Iythology, I have been drinking deep
draughts of maundering madness, I have been drink-
ing in good cOll1pany. In this respect 1\11'. Cox has
certainly given me far more credit than I deserve. I
am but one out of l11any laborers in this rich field of
scientific research, and he ought to have given far
greater pron1inence to the labors of Grimm, Bnrnouf,
Eopp, and, before all, of nlY learned friend, Professor
J{uhn.
But while, with regard to etymology, 1\11'. Cox COl1-

94 ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY.

tents hinlself with reporting the results of other schol-
ars, he stands quite independent in his own treatInent
of C0l11parative l\lythology. Of this Professor Blackie
Seel11S to have no suspicion whatever. The plan which
l\lr. Cox follo,vs is to collect the coincidences in the
legends then1selves, and to show how in different
nlytlls the saIne story with slight variations is told
again and again of different gods and heroes. In this
respect his ,vork is entirely original and very useful;
.for although these coincidences 111ay be explained in
different ,vays, and do not afford a proof of a comnlon
historical origin of the mythologies of India, Greece,
Italy, and Gerll1any, they are all the n10re interesting
frolH a purely psychological point of view, and supply
important nlaterial for further researches. l\lr. Ty lor
has lately worked ,vith great success in the same rich
mine; extending the Ii n1Íts of 111ythological research
far beyond the precincts of the Aryan world, and
sho,ving that there are solar myths ,vherever the sun
shines. I differ from 1\11'. Cox on 111any points, as he
differs fron1 111e. I shall certainly keep to 111Y own
method of never atternpting an interpretation or a
c0111parison, except where the ground has first been
cleared of aU uncertainty by etymological research,
and where the names of different gods and heroes
have been traced back to a COlllll1on source. I call this
the norninalistic as opposed to the realistic n1ethod of
Conlparative l\lythology, and it is the fortner only
that concerns the st.udent of the Science of Language.
I gratefully acknowledge, however, the help which I
have received fron1 1\11'. Cox's work, particularly as
suggesting new clusters of luyths that might be dis-
entangled by etyn1010gical analysis.
But not only has Professor Blackie failed to per-

ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY. 95

ceive the real character of 1\11'. Cox's researches, but
he has actually charged him with holding opinions
which both Mr. Cox and myself have repeatedly dis-
avowed, and most stre
1uously opposed. Again and
again have we warned the students of COll1parative
l\Iythology that they nlust not expect to be able to
explain everything. Again and again h
ve we pointed
out that there are irrational elell1ents in l11ythology,
and that we must be prepared to find grains of local
history on ,vhich, as I said,1 the "sharpest tools of
COlllparative
Iythology must bend or break. Again
and again have we shown that historical persons 2 -
not only Cyrus and CharJenlagne, but Frederick Bar-
barossa and even Frederick the Great - have been
dra,vn into the vortex of popular Inythology. Y pt
these are the ,vords of Professor Blackie: ""The cool
,yay in which 1\Iax l\Iül1er and his English disciple,
Mr. Cox, aSSlllne that there are no luunan figures and
historical characters in the 'v hole gallery of heroes
and demi-gods in the Greek l\fythology, is sOll1ething
very renlarkable."
I readily adll1it that some of the etynlologies ,vlIich
I have proposed of nJythological nalnes are open to
criticisnl; and if, like other scholars, Professor Blackie
had pointed out to me any cases where I might seem
to hinl to have offended against Grill1m's la,v or other

1 Selected Essays, yol. i. p. 478: "Here then we see that mythology
does not always create its own heroes, but that it lays hold of real history,
and coils itself round it so closely that it is difficult, nay, almost impossi-
ble, to separate the iyy from the oak, the lichen from the granite to which
it clings. And here is a lesson which comparative mythologists ought not
to neglect. They are naturally bent on explaining everything that can be
explained; but they should bear in mind that there may be elements in
e\Tery mythological riddle which resist etymological analysis, for the sim-
ple reason that their origin was not etymological, but historical."
2 Lectures on the Science of Language, vol. iÏ. p. 581.

96 ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF :MYTHOLOGY.

phonetic rules, I should have felt n10st grateful; but
if he tells me that the Greek Erin)7s should not be
derived from the Sanskrit Sara.nyû, but fronl the
Greek verb ÊPWÚEl.V, to be angry, he 111ight as well de-
rive critic from to criticise
. 1 and if he maintains
that a nan1e n1ay have two or three legitÏ1nate ety-
1110logies, I can only ans,ver that we 1111ght as well
say that a child could have t,vo or three legitimate
mothers.
I have most reluctantly entered upon these son1e-
"That personal explanations, and I sh0uld not have
done so if I alone had been concerned in Professor
Blackie's onslaught. I hope, ho-wever, that I have
avoided anything that could give just offence to Pro-
fessor Blackie, even if he should be present here to-
night. Though he abuses me as a GenTIan, aud
laughs at the instinctive aversion to external facts
and the extravagant passion for self-evolved ideas as
national failings of all Gernlans (1 only wonder that
the story of the c
unel and the inner consciousness
did not COlne in), yet I kno\v that for many years
German poetry and GernHtn scholarship have had fe\v
1110re ardent adlnirers, and GerIllan scholars fp\v more
trusty friends, than Professor Blackie. Nationality,
it seems to me, has as little to do ,vith scholarship as
with logic. On the contrary, in every nation he that
will work hard and reason honestly may be sure to

1 Professor Blackie quotes Pausanias in 8upport of this etymology. He
says: "The account of Pausanias (viii. 25, 26), according to which the
terrible impersonation of conscience, or the violated moral law, is deriyed
from Èptvvt'tv, flD oM Greek verb originally signifying' to be angry, has suf-
ficient probabiJity, not to mention the obyious analogy of ' Apai, another
name sometimes gi\
en to the awful maids (uEfl.Vaí), from àpá, an impreca-
tion." If Professor lllackie will refer to Pausanias himself, he will find
that the Arcadians assigned a very different cause to the anger of Demeter,
which is supposed to have ]ed to the formation of her new Ilame Erinys.

ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF MYTHOLOGY. 97

discover some grains of truth. National jealousies
and aninlosities have no place in the republic of let-
ters, which is, and I trust ahvays \vill be, the true in-
ternational republic of all friends of work, of order,
and of truth.

YOLo Y.

III.

ON FALSE ANALOGIES

OOMPARATIVE THEOLOGY.

VERY different fronl the real siulilarities that can
be discovered in nearly all the religions of the \vol'ld,
and ,vhich, owing to their deeply luunan character,
in no "ray necessitate the adnlission that one religion
borrowed froIn the other, are those minute coinci-
denc
s betwpen the Je,vish and the Pagan religions
,vhich have so often been discussed by learned theo-
logians, and ,vhich ,,,ere intended by then1 as proof
positive, either that the Pagans borrowed their re-
ligious ideas direct frotH the Old 1'estcunent,. or that
SOUle fragnlents of a prinleval revelation, granted to
the ancestors of the ,vhole race of 11lankind, had been
preserved in the telnples of Greece and Italy.
Bochart, in his "Geographia Sam'a," considered
the identity of Noah and Saturn so fil'l111y established
as hardly to aùn1Ït of the possibility of a. doubt. 'The
three sons of Saturn - Jupiter, Neptune, and Plutq
- he represented as having been originally the three
sons of Noah: Jupiter being IIam; Neptune, Japhet;
aud Shell), Pluto. Even in the third generation the
two fan1Ïlies \V(->l'e proved to have been one, for Phut,
the son of HelIn, or of Jupiter Hall1nl0n, could be no
other than Apollo PythillS; Canaan no other than

ON FALSE ANALOGIES.

l'ilercury; and Nilllrod no other than Bacchus, whose
original name 'was supposed to have been Bar-chus,
the son of Cush. G. J. V ossius, in his learned ,york,
"De Origine et Progressu Idolatriæ" (1688),. identi-
fied Saturn with Ad<.un, Janus with Noah, Pluto ,vit.h
Han1, Neptune with Japhet, 1\1 inerva ,vith N aamah,
Vulcan with Tubal Cain, Typhon ,vith Og. . fluet,
the friend of Bochart, and the colleague of Bossuet,
went still farther; and in his classical work, the
"Den10nstratio EVHngelica," he att
mpted to prove
that the ,vhole theology of the heathen nations ,vas
borrowed fron1 l\loses, 'VhOll1 he identified not only
with ancient law-givers, like Zoroaster and Orpheus,
but ,vith gods and denli-gods, such as Apollo, Vulcan,
Faunus, and Priapus.
All this happened not more than two hundred
years ago; and even a hunch.ed years ago, nay, even
after the discuvery of Sa.nskrit and the rise of COln-
parative Philology, the troublesome ghost of Huet was
by no means laid at once. On the can trary, as soon
as the ancient language and religion of India became
known in Europe, they were received by nlany people
in the sanle spirit. Sanskrit, like all other languages,
was to be del'i ved from Hebre\v, the ancient religion
of the Bralllnans from the Old Testanlent.
There was at that titne an enthusiasnl al110ng Ori-
ental scholars, particularly at Calcutta, and an inter-
est for Oriental antiquities in the public at large, of
which we in these days of apathy for Eastern litera-
ture can hardly fornl an adequate idea. Everybody
,vished to be first in the field, and to bring to light
SOI11e of the treasures \vhich were supposed to be hid-
den in the sacred literature of the Brallll1ans. Sir
Willian1 Jones, the founder of the Asiatic Society

100

ON FALSE ANALOGIES

at Calcutta, published in the first voluule of the
"Asiatic Researches" his fan10us essay, "On the
Gods of Greece, Italy, and India. ; " and he took par-
ticular care to state that his essay, though published
only in 1788, had been \vritten in 1784. In that es-
say he endeavored to sho\v that there existed an inti-
mate connection, not only between the Inythology of
India and that of Greece and It
ly, but likewise be-
tween the legendary stories of the Brahll1a.ns and the
accounts of certain historical events as recorded in
the Old Testament. No doubt, the telnptation ,vas
great. Noone could look down for a lnoment into
the r
ch luine of religious and luythological lore that
,vas suddenly opened before the eyes of scholars and
theologians, without being struck by a host of sill1Ï-
larities, not only in the languages, but also in the an-
cient traditions of the Hindus, the Greeks, and the
Romans; and if at that time the Greeks and Romans
\vere still supposed to have borrowed their language
and their religion from Jewish quarters, the same
conclusion could hardly be avoided ,vith regard to
the language and the religion of the Brahll1ans of In-
dia.
The first Ì1npulse to look in the ancient religion of
India for relniniscences of revealed truth seems to
have COlne fron1 111issionaries rather than frolll schol-
ars. It arose fro1l1 a n10tive, in itself nlost excellent.,
of finding SOll1e conllllon ground for those who ,vished
to convert and those ,vho \vere to be converted. Only,
instead of looking for that COlnlnon ground \vhere it
really was to be found - nanlely, in thè broad foun-
dations on which all religions are built up: the belief
in a divine power, the acknowledgnlent of sin, the
habit of prayer, the desire to offer sacrifice, and the

IN COMPARATIVE THEOLOGY.

101

hope of a future life - the students of Pagan relig-
ion as well as Christian missionaries were bent on
discovering l110re striking and more startling coinci-
de
ces, in order to use them in confhmation of their
favorite theory that sorne rays of a primeval revela-
tion, or some reflection of the J e,vish religion, had
reached the uttermost ends of the world. This ,vas
a dangerous proceeding - dangerous because superfi-
cial, dangerous because undertaken with a foregone
conclusion; and very soon the saIne argun1ents that
had been used on one side in order to prove that all
religious truth had been derived fron1 the Old Tes-
t:unent ,vere turned against Christian scholars and
Christian 111issionaries, in order to sho\v that it ,vas
not TIrahlnanisn1 and Buddhisll1 ,vhich had borrowed
from the Old and N e\v Testament, but that the Old
and the N e,v Testament had borrowed from the more
ancient religions of the Brahmans and Buddhists.
This argun1ell t ,vas carried out, for instance, in
Holwell's " Original Principles of the Ancient Brah-
mans," published in London as early as 1779, in which
the author 11laintains that" the Brahn1anic religion is
the first and purest product of supernatural revela-
tion," and "that the Hindu scriptures contain to a
mora} certainty the original doctrines and terms of
restoration delivered fronl God hin1self, by the mouth
of his first created Birmah, to mankind, at his first
creation in the form of man."
Sir William Jones 1 tells us that one or two mis-
sionaries in India had been absurd enough, in their
zeal for the conversion of the Gentiles, to urge" that
the Hindus were even now almost Christians, be-

1 Asiatic Researches, i. p. 272; Life of Sir W. Jones, vol. ii. p. 240
seq.

102

OÑ FALSE ANALOGIES

cause their Brahnla, Vishnu, and l\Iahesa were no
other than the Christian Trinity;" a sentence in
which, he adds, \ve can only doubt ,vhether folly, ig-
norance, or impiety predominates.
Sir 'Villianl Jones hin1self ,vas not likely to fall
into that error. He speaks against it most emphat-
ically. "Either," he says, "the first eleven chapters
of Genesis - all due allowance being nlade for a fig-
urative Eastern style - are trne, or the whole fabric
of our national religion is false; a conclusion 'which
none of us, I trust, ,vollld \yish to be dra,v11. But it
is not the truth of our national religion as such that
I have at heart; it is truth itself; and if any cool,
unbiassed reasoner ,vill clearly convince IDe that
l\Jloses drew his narrative through Egyptian conduits
from the prinleval fountains of Indian literature, I
shall esteelll hinl as a friend for having ,veeded 111Y
mind fronl a capital error, and pr0111Ìse to stand
al110ngst the forenlost in assisting to circulate the
truth \vLich he has ascertained."
But though he speaks so strongly against the un-
critical proceedings of those ,vho ,vould derive any-
thing that is found in the Old Testament fronl In-
dian sources, Sir William Jones himself was really
guilty of the same want of critical caution in his own
attempts to id
ntify the gods and heroes of Greece
and Rome with the gods and heroes of India. He
begins his essay,l " On the Gods of Greece, Italy, and
India," with the following remarks: -
"We cannot justly conclude, byargulllents pre-
ceding the proof of facts, that one idolatrous people
nlust have borrowed their deities, rites, and tenets
from another, since gods of all shapes and dimensions
1 Asiatic Researches, i. p. 221.

IN COMPARATIVE THEOLOGY.

103

lllay be framed by the boundless po,vers of imagina.
tion, or by the frauds and follies of 111en, in countries
11ever connected; but when features of resemblance,
too strong to have been accidental, are observable in
different systell1S of polytheisln, without fancy or
prejudice to color theln and in1prove the likeness, ,ve
can scarce help believing that SOll1e connection has
inllnen10rially subsisted between the several nations
who have adopted them. It is my design in this .es
say to point out such a resen1blance between the pop.
ular worship of the old Greeks and Italians and that
of the IIindus; nor can there be any rOOlll to doubt
of a great sin1ilarity between their strange religions
and that of Egypt, China, Persia, Phrygia, Phænice,
and Syria; to which, perhaps, ,ve Inay safely add
SOB1e of the southern kingdol11s, and even islands of
America; ,vhile the Gothic system which prevailed
in the northern regions of Europe was not l11erely
similar to those of Greece and Italy, but aln10st the
same in another dress, ,vith an embroidery of in1ages
apparently Asiatic. FrOlTI all this, if it be satisfac-
torily proved, we n1ay infer a general union or affinity
between the n10st distinguished inhabitants of the
prin1itive world at the tinle ,vhen they deviated, as
they did too early deviate, frolll the rational adora-
tion of the only true God."
oJ
Here, then, in an essay written nearly a hundred
years ago by Sir 'V. Jones, one of the nlost celebrated
Oriental scholars in England, it 111ight seem as if ,ve
should find the first outlines of that science which is
looked upon as but of to-day or yesterday - the out-
lines of Comparative Mythology. But in such an
expectation we are disappointed. 'Vhat we find is
merely a superficial comparison of the mythology of

10-1

ON FALSE ANALOGIES

India and that of other nations, both hryan and
Sen1Ïtic, without any scientific value, because carried
out without any of those critical tests \vhich alone
keep Con1parative l\1ythology from running riot.
This is not intended as casting a slur on Sir W.
J ones. At his time the principles which have no\v
been established by the students of the science of
language were not yet known, and as \vith \vords, so
with the names of deities, similarity of sound, the
1110st treacherous of aU sirens, was the only guide in
such researches.
It is not pleasant to have to find fault with a man
possessed of such genius, taste, and learning as Sir
W. Jones, but no one who is acquainted "\vith the his-
tory of these researches will be surprised at my words.
It is the fate of all pioneers, not only to be left be-
hind in the assault which they had planned, but to
find that many of their approaches were made in a
false direction, and had to be abandoned. But as the
authority of their nalnes continues to s\vay the public
at large, and is apt to mislead even painstaking stu-
dents and to entail upon them repeated disappoint-
ments, it is necessary that those who know should
speak out, even at the risk of being considered harsh
or presumptuous.
A few instances will suffice to show how utterly
baseless the cOlnparisons are which Sir W. Jones in-
stituted between the gods of India, Greece, and Italy.
He COlnpares the Latin Janus with the Sanskrit deity
Ganesa. It is wen known that Janus is connected
with the. same root that has yielded the names of
Jupiter, Zeus, and Dyaus, ,vhile Ganesa is a COln-
pound, meaning lord of hosts, lord of the cOlnpanies
of gods.

IN CO
IPARATIVE THEOLOGY.

105

Saturnus is supposed to have been the same as
Noah, and is then identified by Sir 'V. Jones ,vith
the Indian l\Ianu Satyavrata, \vho escaped froln the
flood. Ceres is con1pared with the goddess Sri, Jupi-
ter or Diespiter ,vith Indra or Divaspati; and though
etY111010gy is called a \veak basis for historical inqui-
ries, the three syllables J ov in J avis, Zeu in Zeus,
and Siv in Siva are placed side by side, as possibly
containing the same root, only differently pronounced.
Now the s of Siva is a palatal s, and no scholar who
has. once looked into a book on COll1parative Philol-
ogy need be told that such an s could never corre-
spond to a Greek Zeta or a Latin J.
In I{rishna, the lovely shepherd-god, Sir ,V . Jones
recognizes the features of A pallo N on1ius, ,vho fed
the herds of Admetus, and sle\v the dragon Python;
3nd he leav
s it to etYIl1ologists to detern1Ïne whether
Gopâla - i. e., the cow-herd - n1ay not be the same
word as Apollo. 'Ve are also assured, on the author-
ity of Colonel Vallancey, that 1{1'ishna in Irish means
the sun, and that the goddess I\:âlî, to whon1 human
sacrifices ,vere offered, as enjoined in the Vedas (?)
was the sanle as Hekate. In conclusion, Sir 'V.
Jones ren1arks, "I strongly incline to believe that
Egyptian priests have acttially COlne from the Nile to
the Gangâ and Yamunfi., and that they visited the
Sarn1ans of India, as the sages of Greece visited theIn,
rather to acquire than to in1part knowledge."
The interest that had been excited by Sir 'Villian1
Jones's researches did not subside, though he hiulself
did not return to the subject, but devoted his great
powers to more useful labors. Scholars, both in In-
dia and in Europe, wanted to kno\v more of the an-
cient religion of India. If Jupiter, Apollo, and Janus

106

O FALSE ANALOGIES

had once been found in the ancient pantheon of the
Brahulans; if the account of Noah and the deluge
could be traced back to the story of l\lanu Satyavrata,
who escaped fronl the flood, lTIOre discoveries might
be expected in this ne\vly-opened Inine, and people
rushed to it \vith all the eagerness of gold-diggers.
The idea that everything in India "\-vas of extreme
antiquity had at that tÏ1ne taken a firnl hold on the
minds of all students of Sanskrit; and, as there \vas
no one to check their enthusiaslll, everything that
caIne to light in Sanskrit literature was readily ac-
cepted as more ancient than HOlner, or even than the
Old Testament.
It was under these influences that Lieutenant Wil-
ford, a contemporary of Sir \Villiam Jones at Cal-
cutta, took up the thread ,vhich Sir 'Villiam Jones
had dropped, and deternlined at all hazards to solve
the question ,vhich at that tilne had excited a world-
wide interest. Convinced that the Brahmans pos-
sessed in tl1eir ancient Jitel'ature the originals, not
only of Greek and Roman 11lythology, but likewise
of the Old Testament history, he tried every possible
Ineans to overconle their reserve and reticence. He
related to them, as well as he could, the principal
stories of classical nlythology, and the leading events
in the history of the Old Testanlent; he assured
thenl that they ,vould find the same things in their
ancient books, if they would. but look for them; he
held out the hopes of ample re,vards for any extracts
fronl their sacred literature containing the histories
of Adam and Eve, of Deukalion and Prometheus;
and at last he succeeded. The coyness of the Pan-
dits yielded; the incessant demand created a supply;
and for several years essay after essay appeared in

I COJIP ARA TIVE THEOLOGY.

107

the "Asiatic Researches," with extracts from San-
sIn-it :à1SS., containing not only the nalnes of Deuka-
lion, Prometheus, and other heroes and deities of
Greece, but likewise the naines of Adall1 and Eve, of
..A.braham and Sarah.. and all the rest.
Great "\vas the surprise, still greater the joy, not
only in Calcutta, but in London, at Paris, and all the
universities of Gerlllany. The Sanskrit l\1SS. frotH
which Lieutenant 'Vilford quoted, and on \vhich his
theories "\vere based, had been subn1Ïtted to Sir W.
,J ones and other scholars; and though many persons
"\vere surprised, and for a time even incredulous, yet
the fact could not be denied that all "\vas found in
these Sanskrit l\ISS. as stated by Lieutenant Wil-
ford. Sir W . Jones, then President of the Asiatic
Society, printed the follo,ving declaration at the end
of the third volulne of the" Asiatic Researches" :-
"Since I anl persuaded that the learned essay on
Egypt and the Nile has afforded you equal delight
.with that "\vhich I have myself received from it, I
cannot refrain froll1 endeavoring to increase your sat-
isfaction by confessing openly that I have at length
abandoned the greatest part of the natural distrust
and incredulity "\vhich had taken possession of nlY
mind before I had exan1ined the sources fron1 which
our excellent associate, Lieutenant vVilford, has dra\vn
so great a variety of new and interesting opinions.
Having lately read again and again, both alone and
with a Pandit, the numerous original passages in the
Pur
nas, and other Sanskrit books, which the writer
of the dissertation adduces in support of his asser-
tions, I aln happy in bearing testinlony to his perfect
good faith and general accuracy, both in his extracts
and in the translation of then1."

108

ON FALSE AXALOGIES

Sir 'V. Jones then proceeds hin1self to give a trans-
lation of SOlne of these passages. "The follo\villg
translation," he \vrites, "of an extract frolll the Pad-
nla-purâna is n1Ïnutely exact" : -
"'1. To Satyavarnlan, the sovereign of tbe
,yhole earth, "'''ere born three sons; the eldest, S 11 e r-
III a; then C h a r 111 a; and thirdly, J yap e t i.
"2. They \vere all 111en of good 111ol'als, excellent
in virtue and virtuous deeds, skilled in the use of
,veapons to strike \vith, or to be thro\vn, brave l11en,
eager for victory in battle.
"'3. But Satya va rIll an, being continually de-
lighted \vith devout 111eJ.itation, and seeing hi.s sons
fit for don1Ïnion, laid upon then1 the burden of gov-
el'lllnellt,
"4. 'Vhilst he renlained honoring and satisfying
the gods, and priests, and kine. One day, by the act
of destiny, the king, having drunk n1ead,
"5. Becan1e senseless, and lay aslepp naked; then
'vas he seen by Charnla, and by hin1 were his two
brothers called.
"6. '1'0 \VhOnl he said: \Vhat no\v has befallen?
In what state is this our sire? By those t\VO \vas he
hidden with clothes, and called to his senses again
and again.
" 7. J-Iaving recovered his intellect, and perfectly
knowing what had passed, he cursed Ch a rma, say-
ing, Thou shalt be the servant of servants:
"8. And since thou \vast a laugher in their pre-
sence, fr0l11 laughter sbalt thou acquire a nan1e. 'fhen
he gave to She r 111 a the ,,
ide donutÏl1 011 the south
of the sno\vy mountains.
"9. And to J yap e t i be gave all on the north of
the snowy 1110untains; but he, by the po\ver of relig-
ious cOllt
lnplation, obtained snprelne bliss."

IN Cû.MPARATIVE THEOLOUY.

109

After this testilnony frolll Sir W . Jones - wrung
irolll hinl, as it would seeln, against his own wish and
,vill- Lieutenant \Vilford's essays becalne more nu-
nlerous and 1110re startling every year.
At last, however, the coincidences be caIne too
great. rrhe
lSS. ,vere again carefully ex
unined;
antI then it was found that a clever forgery had been
cOIl1mitted, that leaves had been inserted in ancient
1\18S., and that on these leaves the Pandits, urged by
Lieutenant \Vi1ford to disclose their ancient Inysteries
and traditions, had rendered in correct Sanskrit verse
aU that they had heard about Ad
un and A brahanl
froln their inquisitive Inaster. Lieutenant (then Col-
onel) \Vilford did not hesitate for one mOlnent to
confess publicly that he had been inlposed upon; but
in the meantime the mischief had been done, his
essays had been read all over Europe, they retained
their place in the vohulles of the "Asiatic Rp-
searches," and to the present day some of his state-
Ineuts and theories continue to be quoted authorita-
tively by writers on ancient religion.
Such accidents, and, one nlight alnlost say, such
lnisfortunes, ,vill happen, and it ,vonld be extreillely
unfair ,vere we to use unnecessarily harsh language
with regard to those to ,vhom they bave happened.
I t is perfectly true that at presen t, after the progress
that has been nlade in an aCCllrate and critical study
of Sanskrit, it would be unpardonable if any Sanskrit
schular accepted such passages as those translated by
Sir \V. Jones as genuine. Yet it is by no Ineans
certain that a further study of Sanskrit will not lead
to similar disenchantments, and deprive many a book
in Sanskrit literature ,vhich no\v is considered as very
ancient of its clainlS to any high antiquit.y. Certain

110

ON FALSE ANALOGIES

portions of the Veda even, which, as far as our knowl-
edge goes at present, \ve are perfectly justified in re-
ferring to the tenth or t\velfth century before our era,
nlay S0111e day or other dwindle do\vn frolll their high
estate, and those \vho have believed in their extrenIe
antiquity \vill then be held up to blalne or ridicule"
like Sir 'V. Jones or Colonel vVilford. This cannot
be avoided, for science is progressive, and does not
ackno\vledge, even in the IllOst distinguished scholars,
any clailDs to infallibility. One lesson only 111ay \ve
learn froln the disappointtnent that befell Colonel
'Vilford, and that is to be on our guard against any-
thing \vhich in ordinary language \vould be called
" too good to be true."
C0111parative Philology has taught us again and
again that \vhen we find a ,vord exactly the saIne in
Greek and Sanskrit, we Inay be certain that it can-
not be the saIne ,vord; and the same applies to COln-
pUTative l\Iythology. The sallIe god or tbe same
hero cannot have exactly the same name in Sanskrit
and Greek, for tbe sinlple reason that Sanskrit and
Greek have deviated frolH each other, have both fol-
lowed their own ,vay, have both suffered their own
phonetic corruptions; and hence, if they do pOSSl'SS
the S,Hne word, they can only possess it either in its
Greek or its Sanskrit disguise. And if that caution
applies to Sanskrit and Greek, Inelubers of the sanle
fall1ily of language, how llluch more strongly 1110st it
apply to Sanskrit alld Hebrew! If the first lnan
,vere called in Sanskrit Âdima, and in l-Iebre,v Adam,
and if the tWQ were really the same word, then He-
brew and Sanskrit could not be In(-'Jnbers of t",.,.o dif-
ferent fanlilies of speech, or \ve should be driven to
admit that Adanl ,vas borro,ved by the J e\vs froln

IN COMPARATIVE THEOLOGY.

111

the Hindus for it is in Sanskrit only that âdima
nleans the first, whereas in Hebre,v it has no such
111eanlng.
The saIne renlark applies to a curious coincidence
pointed out nlany years ago by 1\lr. Ellis in his
"Polynesian Researches" (London, 1829, vol. ii. p.
38). "\Ve there read:-
'" A very generally received Tahitian tradition is
that the first 11lunan pair ,vere nlade by Taaroa, the
principal deity fonnerly ackno,vledged by the nation.
On nlore than one occasion I have listened to the de-
tails of the people respecting his work of creation.
rrhey say that, after Taaroa had fortned the ,vorld,
he created man out of araea, red earth, ,vhich was
also the food of tnan until bread first ,vas ll1ade. In
connection with this SOlne relate that Taaroa one Jay
called for the Inan by nalne. \Yhen he caIne, he
caused hilll to fall asleep, and, ,vhile he slept, he
took out one of his Ù'i, or bones, and with it Inade
a wonlan, whonl he gave to the man as his ,vife, and
they becalne the progenitors of mankind. This,"
Mr. Ellis continues, " al \vays appeared to Ine a lucre
recital of the l\losaic account of creation, which they
had heard from sonle European, and I never placed
any reliance on it, although they have repeatedly
told me it was a tradition alnong thenl before any
foreigners arrived. Some have also stated that the
,voman's name was Ivi, which ,vould be by thelll pro-
nounced as if written Eve. Ivi is an aboriginal word,
and not only signifies a bone, but also a ,vidow, and
a victim slain ill war. Notwithstanding the assertion
of the natives, I alTI disposed to think that Ivi, or
Eve, is the only aboriginal part of the story, as far as
it respects the nlother of the human race. Should

112

ON FALSE ANALOGIES

l1101'e careful and 111inute inquiry confinn the truth of
this declaration, and prove that their account was in
existence anlong thern prior to their intercourse \vith
Europeans, it \vill be the nlost renlarkable and val-
uable oral tradition of the origin of tlie hunlan race
yet kno\yn."
In this case, I believe the probability is that the
story of the creation of the first \VOnlan froln the
bone of a Ulan 1 existed tUl10ng the Tahitians before
their intercourse with Christians, but I need hardly
add that the similarity bet\veen the Polynesian name
for bone, i-vi, even when it was used as the ntllne of
the first wonlan, and the English corruption of the
Hebrew iï
O, Chãvah, Eve, could be the result of ac-
cident only. vVhateve1' Chãvah nleaut in Hebl'e\v,
whether life or living or anything else, it never meant
bone, \vhile the Tahitian i-vi, the lVlaori whe-va,l meant
bone, and bone only.
These principll
s and these cautions were hardly
thought of in the days of Sir Willianl Jones and
Colonel \Vilford, but they ought to be thought of at
present. Thus, before Bopp had laid do\vn his code
of phonetic la\vs, and before Burnouf had \vritten his
,yorks on Blldùhislll, one cannot be very much sur-
prised that Buddha should have been identified with

Iinos and Lanlech; nay, that even the Babylonian
deity BeIns, and the Teutonic deity \Vorlan or Ot1in,
should have been supposed to be connected \vith the
founder of Buddhism in India. As Burnouf said in
his" Introduction à l'IIistoire du Budùhislne," p. 70 :
" On avait même fait dll Buddha une planète; et je

1 See Introduction to the Science of Religion, p. 48.
2 The Rev. W. 'V. Gill tens me that the Maori word for bone is iwi, but
he suspects a foreign origin for the fable
JUllded 011 it.

IN COßIP ARA TIVE THEOLOGY.

113

ne sais pas si quelques savants ne se plaisent pas en-
core aujourd'hui à retrouver ce sage paisible sous les
traits du belliqueux Odin." But 've did not expect
that we should have to read again, in a book pub-
lished in 1869, such stateIuents as these: 1_
"There is certainly a lTIuch greater sin1ilarity be-
tween the Buddhism of the Topes and the Scandi-
navian n1ythology than bet,veen it and the Buddhism
of the books; but still the gulf bet,veen the two is
imluense; and if any traces of the doctrines of the
gentle ascetic (Buddha) ever existed in the bosom of
Odin or his followers, ,vhile d ,veIling near the roots
of the Caucasus, all that can be said is, that they
suffered fearful ship,vreck among the rocks of the
savage snperstitions of the North, and sank, never
again to appear on the surface of Scandinavian my-
thology. If the two religions COlne any,vhere in con-

1 Tree and Serpent Worship, by James Fergusson. London, 1868.
Very similar opinions had been advocated by Rajendralal Mitra, in a pa-
.per published in 1858 in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, "Buddh-
ism and Odinism, illustrated by extracts from Professor Holmboe's l\Ie-
moir on the Traces du Buddhisme en Norrège." How much mischief is
done by opinions of this kind when they once find their way into the gen-
eral public, and are supported by names which carry weight., may be seen
by the following extracts from the Pioneer (July 30, 1878), a natÎ\Te paper
published in India. Here we read that the views of Holmboe, Rajendralal
Mitra, and Fergusson, as to a possible connection between Buddha and 'V 0-
dan, between Buddhism and 'Y odenism, have been adopted and preached by
an English bishop, in order to convince his hearers, who were chiefly Buddh-
ists, that the religion of the gentle ascetic came originally, if not from the
Northeast of Scotland, at all events from the Saxons.

Gotama Buddha,"
he maintained, "was a Saxon," coming from" a Saxon family which had
penetrated into India." And again: "The most convincing proof to us
Anglo-Indians lies in the fact that the Purânas named Varada and
Iatsy
distinctly assert that the 'Vhite Island in the West - meaning England-
was known in India as Sacana, having been conquered at a very early
period by the Sacas or Saks." After this the bishop takes courage, and
says: "Let me call your attention to the Pâli word Nibban, called in
Sanskirt Nirvâna. In tbe Anglo-Saxon you have tbe identical word-
N abban, meaning- "not to have," or " to be without a thing."
VOL. v. 8

114

O FALSE ANALOGIES

tact, it is at their base, for underlying both there ex-
isted a strange substratnnl of "free and Serp
nt \V or-
ship; on this the two structures seenl to have been
raised, though they afterwards diverged into fOflllS so
strangely dissilllilar" (p. 34).
Or again (p. 32) :-
'" \Ve shall probably not err far if we regard these
traces of serpent worship as indicating the presence
in the Northeast of Scotland of the head of that col-
umn of nligration, or of propagalldism, which, under
the ll1ytll of ,V od
nisnl, we endeavored in a pre-
vious chapter to trace fronl the Caucasus to Scandi-
. "
na VIa.
"The arbors under \vhich t\VO of the couples are
seated are curious instances of that sort of Slunnler-
house which l11ay be found adorning tea-gardens in
the neighborhood of London to the present day. It
is scenes like these that 111ake us hesitate before as-
serting that there conld not possibly be any connec-
tion bet\veen Buddhisln and VV odenism " (p. 140).
'" One of the lnost tenlpting 110n1Ínal silllilarities
connected with this subject is suggested by the name
of l\lfìyâ. The nlother of Buddha. was called l\lâyâ.
The nlother of l\Iercury was also l\Iaia, tbe daughter
of Atlas. The ROllUUlS ahvays called \Vodin, 1\ler-
cnry, and dies lJIel'curii and TVodensday alike desig-
nated the fourth day of the \veek. . . . . 1"'hese and
other silllÍlarities have been frequently pointed out
and insisted upon, and they are too nunlerous and
too distinct not to have SOUle foundation in reality"
(p. 186, note).
Statenlents like these cannot be allo\vcd to pass un-
noticed or uncontradicted, particularly if supported
by tbe authority of a great name; and after having

IN CO:\JPARATIVE THEOLOGY.

115

spoken so freely of the unscientific character of the
mythological cOInparisons instituted by scholars like
Sir vVilliam Jones and Lieutenant Wilford, who can
no longer defend thenlsel Yes, it ,voldd be mere cow-
ardice to shrink from performing the same unpleas-
ant duty in the case of a living writer, who has shown
that he knows ho\v to wield the weapons both of de-
fence and attack.
It is perfectly true that the mother of Buddha
was called Mâyâ, but it is equally true that the San-
skrit l\f
yâ cannot be the Greek l\laiã. It is quite
true, also, that the fourth day of the week is called
dies Mercurii in lAttin, and 'Vednesday in English;
nay, that in San skirt the same day is called Bud h a-
dinaorBudha-vâra. But the origin of all these
names falls ,vithin perfectly historical tilnes, and can
throw no light whatever on the early growth of nlY-
tho logy and religion.
First of all, we have to distinguish between
Bud h a and Bud d h a. The two nalnes, though so
like each other, and therefore constantly nlistaken
one for the other, have nothing in common but their
root. Bud d h a with two d's, is the participle of
b u dh, and means awakened, enlightened. 1 It is the
name given to those who have reached the highest
stage of human wisdonl, and it is known most gen-
erally as the title of Gotalna, Sâkya-muni, the
founder of Buddhism, whose traditional era dates
fronl 543 B. c. Bud h a, on the contrary, with one d,
means sinlply knowing, and it becanle in later times,
when the Hindus received from the Greeks a kno,vl-

1 See Buddhaghosha's Parables, translated by Captain Rogers, with au
Introduction containing Buddha's Dhammapada, translated from Pâ1i, by
M. M., 1870, p. 110, note.

116

ON FALSE ANALOGIES

edge of the planets, the name of the planet Mer-
cury.
It is well known that the names of the seven days
of the ,veek are derived fron1 the names of the plan-
ets,l and it is equally well known that in Europe the
system of ,veeks and week-days is con1paratively of
very modern origin. It was not a Greek, nor a Ro-
ll1an, nor a Hindu, but a J e,vish or Babylonian in-
vention. The Sabbath (Sabbata) was kno,vn and
kept at Rome in the first century B. c. with many
superstitious practices. It is mentioned by tJorace,
Ovid, l'ibullus (dies Saturn i), Persius, J uvenal.
Ovid calls it a day "rebus minus apta gerendis."
Augustus (Suet. "Aug." c. 76) evidently imagined
that the Jews fasted on their Sabbath, for he said,
"Not even a Jew keeps the fast of the Sabbath so
strictly as I have kept this day." In fact, Josephus
(" Contra A pion." ii. 39) was able to say that there
was no town, Greek or nót Greek, where the custom
observing the seventh day had not spread. 2 It is

1 Hare, "On the Names of the Days of the'Veek (Pltilol. .Jfuseum,
Nov. 1831); ldeler, Handbuch der Chronologie, p. 177; Grimm, Deutsche
M ythologie, p. 111.
2 A writer in the Index objects to my representation of what Josephus
said with regard to the observance of the seventh day in Greek and bar-
barian towns. He writes: -
'Y ASHINGTON, Nov. 9, 1872.
" The article by l\1ax l\Iüller in the Inde.x of this week contains, I think,
one error, caused doubtless by his taking a false translation of a passage
from Josephus instead of the original. 'In fact,' says Professor l\IÜller,
· Josephus (Contra Apion. ii. 39) was able to say that there was no town,
Greek or not Greek, where the custom of observing the seventh day had
not spread.' Mr. Wm. B. Taylor, in a discussion of the Sabbath question
with the Rev. Dr. Brown, of Philadelphia, in 1853 (Obligation of the Sab-
bath, p. 120), gives this rendering of the passage: 'Nor is there anywhere
any city of the Greeks, nor a single barbarian nation, whither the institu-
tion of the Hebdomade (which we mark by resting) has not travelled;'
then in a note Mr. Taylor gives the original Greek of part of the passage.

IN COMP ARA TIVE THEOLOGY.

117

curious that ,ve find the seventh day, the Sabbath,
even under its ne,v Pagan nanle, as dies Saturni or
Ií.ronike, 111entioned by lloman and Greek ,vriters,
before the names of the other days of the ,veek made
their appearance. Tibullus speaks of the day of
Saturn, dies Saturni; Julius Frontinus (under Nerva,
96-98) says that Vespasiall attacked the Jews on
the day of Saturn, dies Saturni:1' and Justin J\Iartyr
(died 165) states that Christ was crucified the day
before the day of R
ronos, and appeared to his dis-
ciples the day after the day of I{ronos. He does not
use the naines of Friday and Sunday. Sunday, as
dies Solis, is Inentioned by Justin J\lartyr (" Apolog."
and adds: 'Joseph us does not say that the Greek and barbarian rested,
but that we [the Jews] observe it by rest.'
" The corrected translation only adds strength to Max l\IüIler's position
in regard to the very limited extent of Sabbath observance in ancient
times; and 1\1r. Taylor brings very strong historical proof to maintain the
assertion (p. 2i) that 'throughout all history we discover no trace of a
Sabbath among the nations of antiquity.' "
It seems to me that if we read the whole of Josephus's work, On the An-
tiquityof the Je
cs, we cannot fail to perceive that what Josephus wished
to show towards the end of the second book was that other nations had
copied or were trying to copy the Jewish customs. He says: .Ycþ'
P.WJI T6
lkr)JIÉ)(eYjuaJl 0' JlóP.O& /Caì. TOlS- lÍ).,Àots- ä.rrao"tJI å.Jlepwrrots-, åeì. /Caì. p.âÀÀoII aVTWJI

ÀOJl
Ép.rrmot11/Caut. He then says that the early Greek philosophers, though ap-
parently original in their theoretic speculations, followed the Jewish laws
with regard to practical and moral precepts. Then follows this sentence:
Ov p.f)JI å.ÀM /Caì. rrMeEUtJl
ôYj rroÀvs-

Àos- ')'É')'OJlEJI É/C p.a/Cpov T
S-
p.f;TÉpas- EtJUE-
ßEí.aS-, OV ô' ËUTLJI OV rró
ts- 'EÀÀ
JlwJI ovôYjnuov ovÔÈ ßá.pßapos-, OVÔÈ ÊJI ËeJlOs-, ËJlea
P.1I TÒ T
S- ißôop.áôor;;,
JI å.p')'OVP.EJI
P.ElS-, Ëeos- OV ÔtarrEqJOtTYj/CE, /Caì. at JlYjuTElat leaì.
)..tÍ)(JlWJI å.Jla/CaVUELS- leaì. rroÀÀà TWJI Eis ßPWUtJl
P.lJl 01" JlEJlOlltUP.ÉJlWJI rrapaTET
pYjTat.
MtP.ElUeat ÔÈ rrEtpWJlTat leaì. C"f)JI rrpòs- å.ÀÀ
Àovs-
P.WJI òp.óJlotaJl, /c.T.).. Stanc1in
where it stands, the sentence about the ißôop.áç can only mean that "there
is no town of Greeks nor of bl\rbarians nor one single people, where the
custom of the seyenth- day, on which we rest, has not
pread, and where
fa!'tings, and lighting of lamps, and much of what is forbidden to us with
regard to food are not observed. They try to imitate our mutual concord
also, etc." HebdOl.-Jas, which originally meant the week, is here clearly
used in the sense of the seventh day, and though Josephus may exag-
gerate, what he says is certainly "that there was no town, Greek or not
Greek, where the custom of observing the se\yenth day had not spread."

118

ON FALSE A
ALOGIES

i. 67), and by Tertulliall (died 220), the usual nanle
of that day anlongst Christians being the Lord's-day,
KVpl.aK
, dominica or dOlllÍnicus. Clen1ens of Alex-
andria (died 220) seems to have been the first who
used the naines of Wednesday and Friday, cEp,uov Kat
, A cþpoö[ T'Y}r;
,u
pa.
It is generally stated, on the authority of Cassius
Dio, that the systenl of counting by weeks and ,veek-
days ,vas first introduced in Egypt, and that at his
tin1e, early ill the third century, the RonutllS had
adopted it, though but recently. Be this as it Inay,
it would seem that, if Tibull us could use the nanle of
dies Saturni for Saturday, the ,vhole systen1 of \veek-
days 111USt have been settled and kno,vn at Ronle in
his tilue. Cassius Dio tells us that the n
tlnes were
assigned to each day ÖI.Ù 7f:C]"uápwv, by fours; or by giv-
ing the first hour of the ,veek to Saturn, then gi villg
one hour to each planet in succession, till the t\venty-
fifth hour becall1e again the first of the next day.
Both systen1s lead to the san1e result, as will be seen
fronl the follo,villg table: -

Planets. Latin. FJ.ench. Sanskrit.
1 Saturn 1 Dies Saturni Samedi Salli-vãra
(dies sabbati)
2 Jupiter 6 " Solis Dimanche Ravi-vãra
(dominicus)
3 Mars 4 " Lunæ Lundi Soma-vttra
4 Sun 2 " Martis Mardi Bhauma-vãra
5 Venus 7 " l\1ercl1rii l\Iercredi Budha-vãra
6 :Mercury 5 " Jovis J eudi BJ.ihaspati-vãra
7 :Moon 3 " Veneris Vendredi Sukra-vãra
Old Norse. Anglo-Saxon. English.
1 Saturn 1 laugardagr såtres diig Saturday
(washing day) Sunday
2 Jupiter 6 sl1nnhdagr sunnan däg
3 )[ars 4 mânadagr monan d:ig Monday
4 Sun 2 tysdagr tives däg Tuesday
5 Venus 7 odhin!'dagr vôdenes dii.g 'Veduesday'
6 l\Iercur... 5 thô..:-,dagr thunores däg Thursday
7 Moon 3' friadag.. frige däg .Friday

IN CO:\IP ARATIVE THEOLOGY. II!)
Old-High }'fiddle- High
Planets. Ge'l"'man. German. German.
1 Saturn 1 sam baztag samztac Samstag
(sullnûn âballd) (sunnen âbent) (Sonnabend)
2 Jupiter 6 sunnûn dag sunnen tac Sonntag
3 Mars 4 mânin tac (() m ân tac Montag
4 Sun 2 ziuwes tac zies tac Dienstag
Ccies dac) (eritic)
5 Venus 7 wuotanes tac (7) mittwoch l\Iittwoch
(mittawecha)
6 Mercury 5 donares tac donres tac Donnerstag
7 Moon 3 fria dag frÎtac Freitag

After the naines of the week-days had once been
.settled, \ve have no difficulty in tracing their n1igra-
tion to\vards the East and towards the 'Vest. The
Hindus had their own peculiar systel11 of reckoning
days and 1110nths, but they adopted at a later tÏ1ne the
foreign systelll of counting by weeks of seven days,
and assigning a pr
siJing planetary deity to each of
the seven days, according to the systen1 described
above. As the Indian nalne of the planet 1\Iercury
,vas Budha, the dies lJ-Iercurií was naturally caned
B udha-vâra but never B uddha-vâra; and the
fact that the mother of l\Iercury ,vas called l\laia, and
the mother of Buddha l\lâyâ, could, therefore, have
had no bearing whatever on the nan1e assigned to the
Indian vVednesday.I The very Buddhists, in Ceylon,
distinguish between buddha, the enlightened, and
budha, wise, and call \Vednesday the day of Budha,
not of Buddha. 2 \Vhether the nanles of the planets
were formed in India independently, or after Greek
11lodels, is difficult to settle. The name of Budha, the
knowing or the clever, given to the planet 1\lercury,
seenlS, however, inexpl icable except on the latter hy-
pothesis.

1 Grimm, Deutsche JIytlwlogie, p. 118, note.
2 In Singalese \Yednesday is Badâ, in Tamil Bnrlau. See Kennet, in
India.n Antiquary, 1874, p. UO; D' Alwi--, J ollrnal of Ceylon Branch of the
RU'!irLZ Asiatic Suciety, I8iO, p. 17.

liO

ON FALSE ANALOGIES

Having traced the origin of the Sanskrit name of
the dies JIercurii, nndha-vâl'a, let us no\v see why
the Teutonic nations, though perfectly ignorant of
Buddhism, called the saIne day tbe day of W odan.
That the Teutonic nations received the naines of
the ,yeek-days fronl their Greek and Roman neigh-
bors aònlits of no doubt. For cOl1llnercial and n1Ìli-
tary arrangelTIents between B,olnans and GenTIans
SOlne kind of linguafranca 11lUSt soon have sprung up,
and in it the nanles of the ,veek-days nlust have found
their place. There ,vould have been little difficulty
in eXplaining the Ineaning of Sun-day and l\Jon-day
to the Gerlnans, but in order to Inake then1 under-
stand the meaning of the other llanles, SOITIe expla-
nations must have been given on the nature of the
difIprent deities, in order to enable the GernHtUS to
find corresponding naUles in their own language. A
Roman would tell his GerlUal1 friend tbat dies J 7 eneris
Int-'ant the day of a goddess ,vho represented beauty
and love, and on bearing this the GenTIan would at
once have thought of his o,vn goddess of love, Frey/a,
and have called the dies Veneris the day of FreyJa or
.Friday.1
If Jupiter was described as the god ,vho wields the
thunderbolt, his natural representative in GenTIan
would be IJonar,2 the Anglo-Saxon Thunar, the Old
Norse Thor
. and hence the dies Jovis ".ould be called
the day of Thor, or rrhul'sday. If the fact that J upi-
tel' was the king of the gods had been IllentioneJ, his
proper representative in Gernlan would, no doubt,
have been TVuotan or Odill. 3 As it "ras, JVuotan 01'

1 Grimm, Df:utsche .MytTwlogie, p. 276.
2 Iòid. p. 151.
8 ibid. p. 120.

IN COMP ARA rIVE THEOLOGY.

121

Odin was chosen as the nearest approach to lIfereury,
the character ,vhich they share in conlmon, and which
led to thpir identification, being nlost likely their love
. of trav
l1ing through the air,1 also their granting
\vealth and fulfilling the \vishes of their worshippers,
in which capacity 'V uotan is known by the nan1e of
JVunseh 2 or Wish. We can thus understand ho,v it
happened that father and son changed places, for
while Mereuriu8 is the son of Jupiter, JV'llota-n is the
father of IJonar. Mars, the god of war, was identi-
fied \vith the German Tiu or Ziu, a nalne ,vhich,
though originally the saIne as Zeus in Greek or
D y a u s in Sanskrit, took a peculiarly national char-
acter among the Gennans, and becau1e their god of
war. 3
There remained thus only the dies Saturni, the
day of Saturn, and whether this was called so in
iUlitation of the Latin name, or after an old German
deity of a similar name and character, is a point
\vhich for the .present we nlust leave unsettled.
'Vhat, h'owever, is not unsettled is this, that if the
Germans, in interpreting these nalnes of Roma.n dei-
ties as ,veIl as they could, called the dies Mereurii,
the same day which the Hindus had called the day
of Bud h a (with one d), their day of JVuotan, this
was not because" the doctrines of the gentle ascetic
existed in the bosom of Odin or his followers, while
dwelling near the roots of the Caucasus," but for
very different and much more tangible reasons.
But, apart from all this, by what possible process
1 Grimm, Deutsche Jfythologie, pp. 137-148.
2 Ibid. p. 12G. Oski in Icelandic, the god Wish, one of the namea of
the highest god.
8 Tacit. llist. iv. 64: "Communibus Diis et præcipuo Deorum l\Iarti
gratea agimus."

122

ON FALSE ANALOGIES

could Buddha and Odin have ever been brought to
gether in the flesh? In the history of ancient relig-
ions, Odin belongs to the saIne stratulll of mytho-
logical thought as D y au s in India, Zeu8 in Greece,
Jupiter in Italy. He was worshipped as the supreme
deity during a period long anterior to the age of the
Veda and of Homer. His travels in Greece, and even
in Tyrkland,l and his half-historical character as a .
nlere hero and a leader of his people, are the result
of the latest Euhemerism. Buddha, on the contrary,
is not a mythological, but a personal and historical
character, and to tl1Ïnk of a meeting of Buddha and
Odin, or even of tl1eir respective descendants, at the
roots of Mount Caucasus, would be like imagining an
interview between Cyrus and Odin, between l\Iobaln-
med and Aphrodite.
A comparative study of ancient religions and my-
thologies, as will be seen from these instances, is not
a subject to be taken up lightly. It requires not only
an accurate acquaintance with the minutest details of
comparative philology, but a knowledge of the his-
tory of religions which can hardly be gained without
a study of original doeuments. As long, however, as
researches of this kind are carried on for their own
sake, and from a mere desire of discovering truth,
without any ulterior objects, they deserve no blaIne,
though, for a time, they may lead to erroneous re-
sults. But when coincidences between different relig-
ions and mythologies are searched out simply in sup-
port of preconceived theories, whether by the frieñds
or enemies of religion, the sense of truth, the very
life of all science, is sacrified, and serious mischief
will follow without fail. Here we have a right, not
1 Grimm, I. c. p. 148.

IN COMPARATIVE THEOLOGY.

123

only to protest, but to blame. There is on this' ac-
count a great difference between the books we have
hitherto examined, and a work lately published in
Paris by M. J acolliot, under the sensational title of
" La Bible dans l'Inde, Vie de J eseus Christna." If
this book had been written with the pure enthusiasm
of Lieutenant \Vilford, it might have been passed by
as a mere anachronism. But when one sees how its
author shuts his eyes against all evidence that would
tell against hiln, and brings together, without any
critical scruples, whatever seeins to support his theory
that Christianity is a lnere copy of the ancient relig-
ion of India, mere silence would not be a sufficient
ans,ver. Besides, the book has lately been translated
into English, and will be read, no doubt, by 111any
people who cannot test the evidence on which it pro-
fesses to be founded. 'Ve learn that 1\1. J acolliot
was some years ago appointed President of the Court
of Justice at Chandernagore, and that he devoted the
leisure left him from the duties of his position to
studying Sanskrit and the holy books of the Hindus.
He is said to have put himself in communication with
the Brahmans, who had obtained access to a great
nurn ber of MSS. carefully stored up in the depths of
the pagodas. " The purport of his book is" (I quote
from a friendly critic), " that our civilization, our re-
ligion, our legends, our gods, have come to us from
India, after passing in succession through Egypt, Per-
sia, Judea, Greece, and Italy." This statement, we
are told, is not confined to N1. J acolliot, but has been
admitted by almost all Oriental scholars. The Old
and New TestaulPnt.s are found again in the Vedas,
and the texts quoted by 1\1. J acolliot in support of his
theory are said to leave it without doubt. Brahn1a

124

ON FALSE ANALOGIES

created Adinla (in Sanskrit, the first man) and gave
him for c01llpanion Heva (in Sanskrit, that \vhich
con1pletes life). He appointed the island of Ceylon
for their residence. "\Vhat follows afterwards is so
beautifully described that I may be pardoned for
quoting it. Only I Inust warn lllY readers, lest the
extract should leave too deep an itnpression on their
men10ry, that what 1\1:. Jacolliot cans a silnple trans-
lation fronl Sanskrit is, as far as I can judge, a simple
invention of SOlne slightly n1Íschievous Brahnlan, who,
like the Pandits of Lieutenant Wilford, took advan-
tage of the zeal and creùulity of a French judge: -
" Having created the l\Ian and the 'V oman (sinlul-
taneously, not one after the other), and al1inlated them
,vith the divine afflatus - the Lord said unto thelll:
, Behold, your n1Ïssion is to people this beautiful Isl-
and [Ceylon], where I have gathered together every-
thing pleasant and needful for your subsistence - the
rest of the Earth is as yet uninhabitable, but should
your progeny so increase as to render the bounds of
paradise too narrow a habitation, let them inquire of
me by sacrifice and I will make known my will.'
" And thus saying, the Lord disappeared. . . . .
"Then Adaln and Eve d,velt together for a tinle
in perfect happiness; but ere long a vague disqui-
etude began to creep upon them. . . . . The .Spirit
of Evil, jealous of their felicity and of the work of
llra11111a, inspit"ed theln with disturbing thoughts;-
'Let us ,vander through the Island,' said Athuu to
h
s c0111panion, 'and see if ,ve may not find SOlne part
even more beaut.iful than this.' . . . .
"And Eve followed her husband. . . . wandering
for days and for nlonths; . . . . but as they advanced
the W01uan \vas seized "\vith strange and inexplicable

IN CO:\IPARATIVE THEOLOGY.

125

terrors: 'Adam,' said she, "let us go no farther: it
seenlS to nle that \ve are disobeying the Lord; have
\ve not already quitted the place \vhich he assigned
us for a d\velling and forbade us to leave?'
" , Fear not,' replied Adall1; 'this is not that fear-
ful wilùerness of which he spake to us.' . . . .
" And they \val1dered on. . . . .
" Arriving at last at tbe extrenlity of the Island,
they beheld a smooth and narro\v arm of the sea, and
beyond it a vast and apparently boundless countl
y,
connected \vith their Island only by a narrow and
rocky patln,vay arising from the bosonl of the waters.
"The two \vanderers stood aillazed: the country
before then1 was covered \vith stately trees, birds of
a thousand colors flitting amidst their foliage.
". . . . 'Behold, w hat beautiful things!' cried
Adan1, 'and what good fruit such trees must pro-
duce; . . . let us go and taste thenl, and if that
country is better than this, we will d\vell there.'
" Eve, trell1bling, besought Adanl to do nothing that
might irritate the Lord against them. "Are \ve not
well here? Have \ve not pure \vater and delicious
fruits? \tVherefore seek other things? '
" , True,' l'eplied Adaln, , but we will return; \vhat
harlll can it be to visit this UnkllO\Vn country that
presents itself to our vie\v ?' . . . . And as he ap-
proached the rocks, Eve, trenlbling, followed.
" Placing his wife upon his shoulders, he proéeeded
to cross the space that separated him from the object
of his desires, but no sooner did he touch the shore
than trees, flo\vers, fruits, birds, all that they had per-
ceived frolll the opposite side, in an instant vanished

tlnidst terrific chunor; . . . . the rocks by which
they had crosseù sunk beneath the ,vaters, a fe\v

126

ON FALSE ANALOGIES

sharp peaks alone remaining above the surface, to in-
dicate the place of the bridge ,vhich had been de-
stroyed by Divine displeasure.
"The vegetation ,vhich they had seen from the
opposite shore was but a delusive Inirage raised by
the Spirit of Evil to ternpt them to disobedience.
" AdaIll fell, weeping, upon the naked sands, . .
but Eve throwing herself into his arlns, besought him
"not to despair; . . . . 'let us rather pray to the
Author of all things to pardon us.' . . . .
"And as she spake there caIne a voice from the
clouds, saying,
" , W Olnan ! t/tou hast only sinned from love to thy
husband, wholn I comma.nded thee to love, and thou
hast hoped in me.
" 'I therefore pardon thee - and I pardon hin1
also for thy sake: . . " . but ye may no more return
to paradise, which I had created for your happiness;
. . . . through your disobedience to my comn1ands
the Spirit of Evil has obtained possession of the
Earth. . . . . Your childrpn reduced to labor and to
suffer by your fault will beco1l1e corrupt and forget

me. . . . .

" , But I will send Vishnu, who will be born of a
woman, and who \vill bring to all the hope of a re-
ward in another life, and tbe llleans by prayer of
softening their sufferings.' "
The translator from whom I have quoted exclaÏ1ns
at the end, as wen he might:-
" What grandeur and what sinlplicity is this Hindu
legend! and at the saIne tilue ho"\v sitnply logical!
. . . . Behold here the veritable Eve - the true
WOlnan. "
But much more extraordinary things are quoted

IN COMPARATIVE THEOLOGY.

127

by M. J acolliot, from the Vedas and the commen-
taries.
On p. 63 we read that Manu, Minos, and Manes,
had the same name as 1\loses; on p. 73, the Brah-
mans w.ho invaded India are represented as the suc-
cessors of a great reformer called Christna. The
name of Zoroaster is derived from the Sanskrit Sûr-
yastara (p. 110), meaning "he who spreads the \vor-
ship of the Sun." After it has been laid down (p.
116) that Hebrew was derived from Sanskrit, we are
assured that there is little difficulty in deriving J eho-
vah froln Zeus. l Zeus, J ezeus, Jesus, and Isis are all
declared to be the saIne nalne, and later on (p. 130)
we learn that" at present the Brahlnans who officiate
in the pagodas and temples give this title of Jeseus-
i. e. the pure essence, the divine elnanation - to
Christna only, who alone is recognized as the Word,
the truly incarnated, by the worshippers of Vishnu
and the freethinkers among the Brahmans."
We are assured that the Apostles, the poor fisher-
men of Galilee, ,vere able to read the Veda (p. 356) ;
and it was their greatest merit that they did not
reject the miraculous accounts. of the Vedic period,
because the world was not yet ripe for freedom of
thought. Kristna, or Christna, we read on p. 360,
signified in Sanskrit, sent by God, prolnised by God,
holy; and as the nalne of Christ or Christo8 is not
Hebre\v, ,vhence could it have been taken except
from l{rishna, the son of Devakt, or, as M. J acolliot
writes, Devallaguy?
It is difficult, nay, almost in1possible, to criticise
or refute such statements, and yet it is necessary to

1 P. 125. " Pour quiconque s'est occupé d'études philologiques, Jéhova
déIivé de Zeus est facile à admettre."

128

ON FALSE ANALOGIES

do SO; for such is the interest, or I should rather
say the feverish curiosity, excited by anything that
bears on ancient religion, that 1\1. J acolliot's book
has produced a vel
y wiùe and very deep impression.
It has been relnarked with SOHle surprise that Vedic
scholars in Europe had failed to discover these im-
portant passages in the Veda which he has pointed
out, or, still worse, that they had never brought
them to the knowledge of the public. In fact, if
anything ,vas wanting to sho,v that a general kno,vl-
edge of the history of ancient religion ought to fOl'ln
part of our education, it ,vas the panic created by 1\1.
Jacolliot's book. It is simply the story of Lieutenant
Wilford over again, only far less excusable no\v than
a hundred years ago. 1\Iany of the words which 1\1.
Jacolliot quotes as Sanskrit are not Sanskrit at all;
others never have the meaning \vhich he assigns to
them; and as to the passages from the Vedas (in-
cluding our old friend the Bhaga veda-gîta.), they are
not from the Veda, they are not fronl any old San-
skrit writer-they simply belong to the second half
of the nineteenth century. vVhat happened to Lieu-
tenant vVilford has happened again to 1\11. Jacolliot.
He tells us the secret himself: -
"One day," he says (p. 280), "when we were
reading the translation of Manu, by Sir 'V. Jones, a
note led 11S to consult the Indian commentator, I{ul-
lûka Bhatta, when ,ve found an allusion to the sacri-
fice of a son by his father prevented by God himself"
after he had commanded it. We then had only one
idée fixe -nan1ely, to find again in the dark nutss of
the religious Looks of the Hindu, the original account
of that event. vVe should never have succeeded but
for 'the complaisance' of a Braillnan ,vith wholn ,ve

IN COMPARATIVE THEOLOGY.

129

were reading Sanskrit, and ,vho, yielding to our re-
quest, brought us frmn the library of his pagoùa the
,yorks of the theologian Ilanuttsariar, ,vhich have
yielded us such precious assistance in this volulne."
As to the story of the son offered as a sacrifice by
his father, and released at the cOlnmand of the gods,
1\1. Jacolliot might bave found tbe original account
of it fronl tbe Veda, both text and translation, in
my "History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature." He
,vould soon have seen that the story of Sunahsepa
being sold by his father in order to be sacrificed in
the place of an Indian prince, has very little in com-
1110n with the intended sacrifice of Isaac by Abraham.
M. Jacolliot has, no doubt, found out by this tilne
that 11e has been imposed upon; and if so, be ought
to follow the exalnple of Colonel Wilford, and pub-
licly state ,vhat has happened. Even then, I doubt
not that his statements ,vill continue to be quoted
for a long time, and that Ad i m a and H e va, tbus
brought to life again, will make their appearance in
many a book and Inany a lecture-room.
Lest"it be supposed tbat such accidents happen to
Sanskrit scholars only, or that this fever is bred only
in the jungles of Indian mythology, I shall nlention
at least one other case ,vhich will sho,v that this dis-
ease is of a more general character, and that want of
caution will produce it j n every clilnate.
Before the discovery of Sanskrit, China had stood
for a long tillle in the place which was afterwards
occupied by India. \Vhen the ancient literature and
civilization of China bec
tlne first kno,vn to the schol-
ars of Europe, the Celestial Enlpire had its adulirers
and prophets as full of entbusiaslll as Sir W. Jones
and Lieutenant Wilford, and there was nothing,
VOL. v. 9

130

ON FALSE ANALOGIES

whether Greek philosophy or Christian Inorality, that
,vas not supposed to have had its first origin among
the sages of China. The proceedings of the Jesuit
missionaries in China were 1110st extraordinary. They
had thenlselves adn1Ïtted the antiquity of the writ-
ings of Confucius and Lao-tse, both of Wh0l11 lived in
the sixth century B. e. l But in their zeal to sho,v
that the sacred books of the Chinese contained nu-
merous passages borrowed from the Bible, nay, even
some of the dogmas of the later Church, they hardly
perceived that, taking into account the respective
dates of these books, they were really proving that a
kind of anticipated Christianity had been accorded to
the ancient sages of the Celestial Elllpire. The Inost
learned advocate of this school was Father Prémare.
Another supporter of the same vie,v, l\Iontucci,2
speaking of Lao-tse's Tao-te-king, says: -
"'Ve find in it so Inany sayings clearly referring
to the triune God, that no one who has read this
book can doubt that the mystery of the most holy
Trinity was revealed to the Chinese more than five
centuries before the advent of Christ. Everybody,
therefore, who kno\vs the strong feeling of the Chi-
nese for their o,vn teachers, will adlnit that nothing
more efficient could be found in order to fix the dog-
mas of the Christian religion in the mind of the Chi-
nese than the denlonstration that these dognlas agree
with their o,vn books. The study, therefore, and tIle
translation of this singular book (the Tao-te-king)
would prove lllost useful to the missionaries, in order
to bring to a happy issue the desired gathering ill of
the Apostolic harvest."
1 Stanislas Julien, Le Livre de la V oie et de la Vertu. Paris, 1842,
p. h y .

Montucci, De st-u:diis sinicÏ$. Berolini, 1808.

IN CO:\IPARATIVE THEOLOGY.

131

"Vhat followed is so extraordinary that, though
it has often been related, it deserves to be related
again, In ore particularly as the \vhole problem which
was supposed to bave been solved once for all by M.
Stanislas Julien, has of late been opened again by
Dr. von Strauss, in the" Journal of the German Ori-
ental Society," 1869.
There is a passage at the beginning of the four-
teenth chapter of the Tao-te-king in which Father
An1yot felt certain that tbe three Persons of the
Trinity could be recognized. He translated it : -
"He who is as it were visible but cannot be seen
is called K hi.
"He \vhom we cannot hear, and who does not
speak to our ear, is caned H Í.
"He ,vho is as it were tangible, but cannot be
touched, is called W e i."
Few readers, I believe, would have been much
startled by this passage, or would have seen in it
what Father Amyot saw. But n10re startling reve-
lations were in storew 1'he most celebrated Chinese
scholar of his tin1e, Abel Rémusat, took up the sub-
ject; and after showing that the first of the three
names had to be pronounced, not I{hi, but I, he
maintained that the three syllables I Hi 'Vei, were
meant for J e-h<J-vah. According to him, the three
characters employed in this nan1e have no meaning
in Chinese; they are only signs of sounds foreign to
the Chinese language; and they were in tended to
render the Greek 'law, the nalne which, according
to Diodorus Siculus, the Jews gave to their God.
Rénnlsat goes on to remark that Lao-tse had really
rendered this Hebrew name more accurately than the
Greeks, because he had preserved the aspiration of

132

ON FALSE ANALOGIES.

the second syl1able, which was lost in Greek. In
fact, he entertained no doubt that this \vord, occur-
ring in the \vork of Lao-tse, proves an intellectual
COIDlTIUnication between the \Vest and China, ill the
sixth century ll. c.
Fortunately, the panic created by this discovery
did not last long. 1\1. Stanislas Julien published in
1842 a con1plete translation of t11is difficult book;
and here all traces of the nalne of Jehovah have dis
appeared. .
"The three syllables," he writes, ",vhich Abel
Rén1usat considered as purely phonetic and foreign
to the Chinese language, have a very clear and in-
telligible lTIcaning, and have been fully eXplained by
Chinese commentators. "fhe first syllable, I, lueans
without color; the second, Hi, \vithout sound or
voice; the third, "Vei, \vithout body. rfhe proper
translation therefore is : -
"You look (for the Tao, the la\v) and you see it
not: it is colorless.
" You listen and you hear it not: it is voiceless.
" You \vish to touch it and you reach it not: it is
without body."
Until, therefore, sOlne other traces can be dis-
covered in Chinese literature proving an intercourse
between China and J uelæa in the sixth cen tury ll. c.,
'\ve can hardly be called upon to believe that the
Jews should have cOlnmul1icated this one nalnl
,
'which they hardly trust
d then1selves to pronounce
at home, to a Chinese philosopher; and ,ve Blust
treat the apparent silnilarity between I-IIi-\Vei and
Jehovah as an accident, \vhich ought to serve as a
useful \varning, though it need ill no ,yay discourage
a careful and honest study of COlllparative 'fheology.

ON SPELLING.

THE remarks ,vhich I venture to offer in these pages
on the corrupt state of the present spelling of English,
and on the advantages and disadvantages connected
,vith a reform of English orthography, ,vere ,vritten
in fulfillment of a pron1Ïse of very long standing.
Ever since the publication of the Second V ohul1e of
my " Lectures on the .Science of Language," in 1863,
'v here I had expressed nlY sincere admiration for the
courage and perseverance \vith \vhich l\Ir. Isaac Pit-
man and some of his friends (particularly 1\11'. Á. J.
Ellis, for six years his nlost active associate) had fought
the battle of a reform in English spelling, l\Ir. Pitman
had been requesting me to state more explicitly than
I had done in nlY "Lectures" my general approval
of his life-long endeavors. He ,vished lTIOre particu-
larly that I should explain ,vhy I, though by pro-
fession an etymologist, ,vas not frightened by the
specter of phonetic spelling, ,vhile such high author-
ities as Arch bishop Trench and Dean Alford had de-
clared that phonetic spelling ,vould nécess!lrily destroy
the historical and etymological chåracter of the En-
glish language.
If I ask nlyself ,vhy I put off the fulfilhnent of nlY

134

ON SPELLING.

promise from year to year, the principal reason I find
is, that really I had nothing n10re trO say than ,vhat,
though in fc\v ,vords, I had said before. Every thing
that can be said on this subject has been said, and 'yell
said, 110t only by 1\11'. Pitman, but by a host of ,vriters
and lecturers, alTIOllg ,vhom I might mention Mr. Alex-
ander J. Ellis, Dr. Lathan1, Professors Haldenlan,
'Vhitney, and Hadley, 1\;11'. 'Vithers, Mr. E. Jones, Dr.
J. H. Gladstone, and many others. The ,vhole matter is
no longer a D1atter for argument; and the older I
gro\v, the more I feel convinced tllat nothing vexes
people so much, and hardens them in their unbelief
and in their dogged resistance to refornls, as unde-
niable facts and unans\verable arguments. Reforms
are carried by Tin1e, and what generally prevaiJs in
the end, are not logical deductions, but some hap-
hazard and frequently irrational motives. I do not
say, therefore, .with Dean S\vift, that" there is a de-
gree of corruption wherein some nations, as bad as the
,vorld is, ,vill proceed to an amendn1cnt; till which
time particular men should be quiet." On the con-
trary, I feel convinced that practical reformers, like
Mr. Pitman, should never slumber nor sleep. They
should keep their grievances before the public in
season and out of season. Thev should have their
01
lamps burning, to be ready ,vhenever the right time
comes. They should repeat the same thing over and
over again, undismayed by indifference, ridicule, con-
tempt, and all the other weapons which the lazy world
kno\vs so ,yell ho,v to employ against those ,vho venture
to disturb its peace.
I mysel ho,vever, am not a practical reformer;
least of all in a matter ,vhich concerns Englishnlen

ON SPELLING.

135

only-namely, the spelling of the English language.
I should much rather, therefore, have left the fight to
others, content with being merely a looker-on. But
,vhen I ,vas on the point of leaving England my con-
science smote me. Though I had not actually given
a pledge, I remembered ho,v, again and again, I had

aid to 1\11'. Pitman that I w'ould much rather keep
than make a promise; and though over\vhelmed \vith
other ,york at the time, I felt that before my depart-
ure I ought, if possible, to satisfy 1\11'. Pitman's de-
mands. The article ,vas written; and though my o,vn
plans have since been changed, and I remain at Ox-
ford, it lllay as ,veIl be published in discharge of a
debt .which has been for some time heavy on my con-
SCIence.
'Yhat I ,vish most strongly to impress on my read-
ers is that I do not ,vrite as an advocate. I am not
an agitator for phonetic reform in England. My in-
terest in the matter is, and always has been, purely
theoretical and scientific. Spelling and the reform
of spelling are problems which concern every student
of the science of language. It does not matter whether
the language be English, German, or Dutch. In every
written language the problem of reforIl1ing its anti-
quated spelling must sooner or later arise; and we
must form some clear notion ,vhether any thing can
be done to remove or alleviate a complaint inherent
in the very life of language. If my friends tell me
that the idea of a reform of spelling is entirely Quix-
otic, that it is a mere waste of time to try to influence
a whole nation to surrender its historical orthography
and to ,vrite phonetically, I bow to their superior ,vis-
dom as men of the world. But as I am not a man of

13ü

ON SPELLING.

the world, but rather an observer of the ,vorld, my
interest in the subject, my convictions as to ".hut is
right and "Tong, relnain just the saIne. It is the duty
of scholars and philosophers not to shrink froin hold-
ing and expressing what nlen of the world call Quix-
otic opiuions; for, if I read the history of the ,yor]d
rightly, the victory of reason over unreason, and the
,vhole progress of our race, have generally been
achieved by such fools as ourselves" rushing in ,,-here
angels fear to tread," till, after a time, the track be-
comes beaten, and even angels are no longer afraid.
I hold, and have confessed, much more Quixotic
theories on language than this belief-that ,,,,hat has
been done before by Spaniards and Dutchmen-,vhat is
at this very mOlnent being dune by G0rll1anS, nanlely,
to reform their corrupt spelling-may be achieved even
by Englishmen and Americans.
I have expressed my belief that the time will come
,vhen not only the various alphabets and systel11S of
sl)elling, but many of the l
nguages themselves which
are now spoken in Europe, to say nothing of the rest
of the ,vorld, will have to be improved a,vay fronl the
face of the earth and abolished. Knowing that noth ing
rouses the ire of a "T e]shman or a Gael so much as
to assert the expediency, nay, necessity, of suppressing
the teaching of their languages at school, it seems
madness to hint that it ,vonld be a blessing to every
child born in RoHand, in Portugal, or in Del1mark-
nay, in Sweden and even in Russia-i instead of
learning a language ,vhich is for life a barrier hetween
them and the rest of mankind, they ,vere at once to
learn one of the great historical languages ,vhich con-
fer intellectual and social fcllo,vship ,vith the ,,,hole

ON SPELLING.

137

,vorld. If, as a first step in the right direction, four
languages only, namely, English, French, German,
Italian (or possibly Spanish) ,vere taught at school,
the saving of time-and \vhat is more precious than
time ?-wouIJ be infinitely greater than ,vhat has been
effected by rail ways and telegraphs. But I kno\v that
no name in any of the doomed languages would be
too strong to stiglllatize such folly. 'Ve should be
told that a Japanese only could conceive such an
idea; that for a people deliberately to give .up its
language ,vas a thing never heard öf before; that a
nation ,vould cease to be a nation if it changed its
language; that it \vould, in fact, commit "the happy
despatch," à la Japonaise. All this may be true, but
I hold that language is meant to be an instrument
of communication, and that in the struggle for life,
the most efficient instrument of communication must
certainly carry the day, as long as natural selection,
or, as \ve formerly called it, reason, rules the \vorld.
The follo.wing figures may be of use in forn1Ïng an
opinion as to the fates of the great languages of
Europe :*-

Portuguese is spoken in
Portugal. by
Brazil, by

3,980,000
10,000,000
13,980,000
27,524,238
. 40,188,000

I tali an, by
French, in France, Belgium, Switzerland, etc., by
Spanish, in
S pain, by
South America, by

16,301,000
. 27,408,082
43,709,082

· See 'V. E. A. Axon's "The Future of the English I.Janguage,"
the "Almanach de Gotha," and De Callùolle's "Histoire des
Sciences, " 1873.

138

ON SPELLING.

Russian, by .
German, by
English, in
Europe, by
America, by
Australia, etc., by .
the Colonies, by .

. 51,370,000
55,789,000

31,000,000
45,000,000
2,000,000
. 1,050,000
-- 79,050,000
According to De Can dolle, the population doubles ill

England, in .
America, among the German races, in
Italy, in
Russia, in .
Spain, in
South America, in .
Germany, in .
France, in .

56 years
25 "
. 135 H
100 u
. 112 II
27 U "
. 100 "
140 "

Therefore, in 200 years (barring accidents)
Italian will be spoken by
Frcnch will be spoken by
German will be spoken by
Spanish will be spoken in
Europe, by
Sou th America, by .

53,370,000
. 72,571,000
157,480,000

36,938,338
408,347,004

-- 505,286,242

English will be spoken in
Europe, by . 178,846,153
United States, and British Depend-
encics, by 1,058,440,000
1,837,286,153

.
But I shall say no more on this, for as it is, I kno,v
I shall never hear the end of it, and shall go down
to posterity, if for nothing else, at least for this the
nlost suicidal foUy in a student of languages; a folly
comparable only to that of Leibniz, ,vho actual1y con-
ceived the possibility of one universal language.
To return, ho,vever, to the problem to the solution
of which 1\ir. Pitman has devoted the 'v hole of his

OY SPELLING.

139

active life, let me say again that n1Y interest in it is
purely philological; or, if you like, historical. The
problem ,vhich has to be solved in England and the
United States of America is not a ne,v one, nor an
isolated one. It occurs again and again in the history
of language; in fact, it must occur. "\Vhen languages
arc reduced to ,vri ting, they are at first ,vritten pho-
netically, though ahvays in a very rough-and-ready
nlanner. One dialect, that of the dominant, the lit-
erary, or priestly character, is generally selected; and
the spelling, once adopted, becomes in a very short
time traditional and authoritative. 'Vhat took place
thousands of years ago, we can see taking place, if ,ve
like, at the present moment. A missionary from the
island of 1\Iangaia, the Rev. 'V. Gill, first introduced
the art of ,vriting among his converts. He learned
their language, at least one dialect of it, he translated
part of the Bible into it, anù adopted, of necessity, a
phonetic spelling. That dialect is gradually becoming
the recognized literary language of the ,vhole island,
and his spelling is taught at school. Other dialects,
however, continue to be spoken, and they may in time
influence the literary dialect. For the present, how-
ever, the missionary dialect, as it is called by the
natives themselves, and the missionary spelling, rule
supren1e, and it ,vill be some time before a spelling
refornl is ,vanted out there.
Among the more ancient nations of Europe, not
only does the pronunciation of language maintain its
inh(\rent dialectic variety, and fluctuate through the
prevalence of provincial speakers, but the ,vhole body
of a language changes, ,vhile yet the spelling, once
adopted in public documents, and taught to children,

140

ON SPELLING.

remains for a long time the same. In early times,
,vhen literature ,vas in its infhncy, \vhen copies of
books could easily be counted, and ,vhen the nO'j'ma
8c'ribendi was in the hands of a fe\v persons, the diffi-
culty of adapting the \vriting to the ever-varying pro-
nunciation of a language was comparatively small.
'Ve see it ,vhen ,ve COll1pare the Latin of early ROlnan
inscriptions \vith the Latin of Cicero. 'Ve kno,v from
Cicero himself that ,vhen he settled anlong the patri-
cians of Rome, he had on SOlne small points to change
both his proll unciation and his spelling of Latin.
The reforn1 of spel1ing ,vas a favorite subject ,vith
Roman scholars, and even enlperors ,vere not too
proud to dabble in inventing ne\v letters and dia-
critical signs. The difficulty, ho\vever, never assun1es
serious proportions. The sn1all minority of people
who \vere able to read and ,vrite, pleased then1selves
as best they could; and, by timely concessions, pre-
vented a complete estrangement bet\veen the ,vritten
and the spoken language.
Then came the time \vhen Latin ceased to be Latin,
and the vulgar dialects, such as Italian, French, and
Spanish took its l)lace. At that titne the spelling ,vas
again phonetic, though here and there tinged by rem-
iniscences of Latin spelling. There ,vas much variety,
but considering ho\v limited the literary intercourse
must have been bet,veen different parts of France,
Spain, or Italy, it is surprising that on the \yhole there
should have been so much uniforn1ity in the spel1in
of these modern dialects. .1\. certain local anù in(li-
vidual fl'eedolll of spelling, however, w'as retaill(.(l;
and \ve can easily detect in Inediæyal 1\188. the R)>{ì 11-
iug of literate and illiterate ,vriters, the hand of

ON SPELLIKO.

141

the learned cleric, the professional clerk, and the lay-
man.

[A style of spelIing will no, v be introduced ,vhich
has received the nalne of Semiphonotypy. It requires
no ne,v letter: "1) })" for the vo,vel in but, son, are
made from" D p" by a pen-knife. The short vo,vels,-
diphthongs, and consonants are all ,vrittell phonetically,
except an occasional "n" == " IJ" before k and g, and
"th" == both "-Ð" and "d;" Jeaving only the long
vo,vels in the old spelling. Six syllables out of seven
are thus ,vritten as in full phOllOtypy. The italic and
script forms of "})" are "'J)" (a turned italic "((,")
and ð

]
The great event hwich formz a deseisiv epok in
the histori ov speling iz the introdukshon ov In-iIlting.
'Vith printed buks, and partikiularli ,vith printed
Beibelz, skaterd over the kuutri, the speling of ,vurdz
be kame rijid, and universali beinding. SInn Iang\vc-
jez, such az Italian, ,ver n10re fortiunate than utherz
in having a n10re rashonal sistem ov speling tu start
,vith. Sum, agen, leik Jerman, ,yer abel tu n1ake
tein1li konseshonz, lnveil utherz, such az Spanish,
Duch, and French, had Akademiz tu help them at
kritikal periodz ov their histori. The most unfor-
tiunate in all theze respekts ,voz Inglish. It started
,vith a I..Iatin alfabet, the pronÐl1siashon ov Invich ,voz
nl1scteld, and h,vich had .tu be apleid tn a Tiutollik
lal1gwej. After this ferst fonetik kompromeiz it had
tu pas through a kOl1fiúzd sistem ov speling, half Sak-
son, half Norman; half fonetik, half tradishollal. Thë
histori ov the spcling, and even ov the pronÐnsiashon,
ov Ing1i:;h, in its pascj from .L\.llglo-Sak
on tu 111Ïdcl

142

ON SPELLING.

and moùern Inglish, haz lateli been studid ,vith
great spkses bei 1\11'. Ellis and 1\11'. Sweet. Ei lllust
refer tu their buks "On Erli Inglish Pronunsia-
shon," and "On the Ristori ov Inglish Sonndz,"
hwich kontain a ,velt.h ov ilpstrashon, almost be,vil-
dering. And even after Inglish reachez the period
ov printing, the konfiuzhon iz bei no n1eanz termi-
nated; on the kontrari, for a teim it iz greater than
ever. Rou this kame tn pas haz been ,yel ilustrated
bei 1\11'. J\;Iarsh in hiz ekselent "Lektiurz on the
Inglish Langwej," p. 687, seq.* H\vot ,ve DOU kall
the establisht sistem ov Inglish orthografi may, in the
main, be trast bak tu Jonson'z Dikshonari, and tn the
stil more kaprishus s,vay ekserseizd bei larj printing
ofisez and publisherz. It iz true that the evil ov
printing karid tu a serten ekstent its own rell1edi. If
the speling bekame unchanjahel, the lang,vej itsel
too, woz, bei meanz ov a printed literatinr, chekt
konsiderabli in its natiural growth and its dealektik
vareieti. N evertheles Inglish haz chanjcd sins the in-
venshon ov printing; Inglish iz chanjing, though bci
imperseptibel degreez, even non; and if ,ve kompare
Inglish az spoken ,vith Inglish az riten, they seem
almost leik t,vo diferent lang\vejez; az diferent az
Latin iz from Italian.
This, no dout, iz a nashonal misfortinn, but it iz
inevitabel. Litel az we perseive it, Jang,vej iz, and
ahvayz must be, in a state ov ferrnenta:;hon; and
h,vether ,vi thin hundredz or thouzandz ov yearz, all
· The pronoun it woz speld in eight diferent wayz bei Tyndale,
th1)S, hyt, hytt, hit, hitt, it, itt, yt, ytt. Annther author speld tongue in
the folowin wayz: tung, tong, tunge, tonge, tounge. The wnrd head
woz variopsli speld hed, hpede, hede, hefode. The spelingz obay, survay,
pray, vail, vain, ar often uzed for obey, survey, prey, veil, vein.

ON SPEI..LING.

143

living Iangwejez must be prepared tu enkounter the
difikulti Invich in lngland starez 1)S in the fase at
prezent. " H wot shal we do 1" ask our frendz. "Ther
iz our hQle nashonal literatiur," they say, "our lei-
brariz aktiuali bursting ,vith buks and nuizpaperz.
AI' all theze tu be thro,vn away 1 AI' all valiuabel
buks tu be reprinted? AI' ,ve ourselvz tu unlern h,vot
we hay lernd with so m!->ch trubel, and hwot we hay
taught tu our children ,vith greater trvbel stil? AI'
,ve tu sakrifeiz all that iz historikal in our langwej,
and sink doun tu the low level ov the Foneiik Nuz'l"
Ei kud go on n1ultipleiing theze kwestionz til even
thoze men ov the wurld ,vho nou hay onli a shrug
ov the shoulder for the reformerz ov speling shud
say, "\V e had no eidea hou strong our pozishon reali
iz."
Bvt with all thát, the problem ren1ainz Dnsolvd.
H,vot ar peopel tu do h,ven lang,vej and pronunsia-
shon chanje, hweil their speling iz deldared tu be
Dnchanjabel1 It iz, ei heliev, hardli nesesari that ei
shud prove hou korupt, erete, and uter1i irrashonal
the prezent sistem ov speling iz, for no,vun seemz
inkleind tu denei all thát. Ei shal onli kwote, there-
for, the jl!jment ov wun man, the late Bishop Thirl-
,valI, a man who never uzed ekzajerated lang,vej.
"Ei luk," he sez "upon the establisht sistem, if an
aksidental klJstom may be so kalld, az a mas ov
anomaliz, the gro,vth ov ignorans and chans, ek,vali
repugnant tu gud taste and tu konlon sens. BDt ei
am a,vare that the pDblik kling tu theze anomaliz
,vith a tenasiti proporshond tu their abslJrditi} and ar
jelus ov all enkroachment on ground konsekrated tu
the free play ov bleind kaprise."

144

ON SPELI...ING.

It may be useful, houeveI', tu k,vote the testimonialz
ov a fiu praktikal D1en in order tu show that this
sistelll ov spC'ling haz I'eali hekum ,vun ov the greatest
nashonal misfortiunz, s,yolowing up Inilionz ov lllunÌ
evcri year and bleiting all atempts at nashonal ed-
iukashon. }\tIr. Ed,vard Jones, a skooln1aster ov
great eksperiens, having then siupcrintendens ov
the Heibernian Skoolz, Liverpool, rote, in the year
1868 :
"The G>>vernment haz for the last t,venti yearz
taken ediukashon 1Huler its kare. They diveided the
su bjekts ov instrukshon intu siks gradez. The hciest
point that ,voz aten1pted in the GJ)vernnlent Skoolz
,voz that a })iupil shud be abel tu read ,vith tolerabel
eaze and ekspreshon a pascj from a niuzpaper, and tu
spel the san1e ,yith a toh
rabel amount ov akiurasi."
Let us Iuk at the rezults az they apear in the re-
port ov the !(omíti ov l{ounsil on Ediukashon for
1870-71 :

Skoolz or Departments 1.mder separate hed teacherz in
Ingland and'Valez inspekted diuring the year 31st
August, 1870, , 15,287
Sertifikated asistant, and piupil teacberz emploid in
theze skoolz 28,033
Skolarz in daili averej atendans tJuo1Jghout the year . 1,1G8,981
Skolarz prezent on the day ov inspekshon 1,473,883
Skolarz prezented for ekzaminashon:
Under ten yearz ov aje . 473,444
Over ten yearz ov aje 292.144

765,588

Skolarz prezented for Standard VI.:
nuder ten yearz ov aje
Over ten yearz ov aje .

227
32,953

33,180
. 30,9R!)
27.Hx!
. 22, $:>!J

Skolarz WllO past in Standard VI.:
1. Reading a short paragraf from a niuzpaper
2. TIeiting the same from di1dasllOJl
3. .Arithmctik

ON SPELLING.

14.5

Therfor, les than ,vun skolar for each teacher, and
les than hvo skolarz for each skool inspekted, reacht
Standard '71.
In 1873 thc state ov thingz, akording tu thc ofishal
returnz ov the Eùiukashon Departnlcnt, \VOZ llluch
the same. Ferst ov all, ther ought tu hay been at
skool 4,600,000 chilùren bet,vecn the ajez ov three
and therteen. "The nDlllber ov children on the rejis-
tel' ov inspekted skoolz \VOZ 2,218,598. Out ov thát
nU111ber, about 200,000 leav skool aniuali, their ediu-
kashon beïng slJpozcd tu be finisht. Out ov theze
200,000, neinti pCI' sent. leav ,yithout reaching the
6th Standard, eighti per sent. \\Tithont reaching the
5th, and siksti per Bent. without reaching the 4th
Standard.
The report for 187-1-75 sho\vz an inkrcas ov chil-
dren on the buks, bot the l)roporshon ov children
pasing in the varius standardz iz sDbstansha1i the
sanIC. (See" Popinlar Ediukasholl," bei E. Jones,
B.A., an eks-skoolnlaster, 1875.) It iz kalkiulated
that for such rezults az theze the knntri, hwcther bei
taksashon or bei voluntari kontribiushol1z, payz nparli
æ3,500,000 aniuali.
Akording tn the same authoriti, 1\11'. E. Jones, it
non takes frolTI siks tu seven yearz tu lern the arts ov
reading and speling \vith a fhir degree ov intelijens
-t11át iz, about 2,000 ourz; and tu nIeni meindz the
difikultiz ov orthografi ar insvrmonntabel. The bulk
ov the children pas through the Guvernnlent skoolz
,vithout having ak,veird the abiliti tu read with eaze
"and intelijens.
".r'tn a vercj cheild," sez anuther skoohnaster, "he-
gining skool at seven, ought tu Le abel tu read the
VOL. v. 10

146

ON SPEI...LING.

Niu Testament fluent1i at eleven or t,velv yearz ov
aje, and at thertecn or fourteen ought tn be aLel tu
read a gud leading artikel ,vith eaze and ekspresholl."
That iz, ,vith seven ourz a ,veek for forti \veeks for
feiv yearz, a cheild rek,veirz 1,400 ourz' ,vurk, tu be
abel tu read the Niu Testanlent.
After a kareful ekzaminashon ov yung men and
wimen from therteen tu t\vel1ti yearz ov aje in the
faktoriz ov Birmingham, it ,voz proved that onli 4!
per sent. ,vel' abel tu read a sill1pcl sentens frolH an
ordinari skool-buk ,vith intelijcns and akiurasi.
This apleiz tu the lo,ver klasez. Bpt \vith regard
tu the heier klasez the kase seemz alnlost ,vurs; for
Dr. l\'1orell, in hiz "1\Ianiual ov Speling," ascrts that
out ov 1,972 faiJinrz in the Sivil Servis Ekzan1Ínashonz
1,866 kandidates ,vcr plukt for speling.
So nluch for the piupilz. Amung the tcacllerz
thenlselvz it ,voz found in Amerika that out ov ""1)11
hundred komon ,vurdz the best speIer aUl1)ug the
eighti or neinti teaeherz ekzamind failù in 'v un, sUln
preiz-takerz faild in four or feiv, and sum utherz nlist
over forti. The Dcpiuti State Siuperintelldent de-
ldared that on an a vcrej the teacherz ov the State
,vud fail in speling tu thp ekstent ov 25 per sent.
H wot, houever, iz even nlore serins than all this
iz not the great ,vaste ov teinl in lerning tu reaJ, and
the almost komplete failiur in nashonal ediuka
hon,
but the aktinal mischcf dDn bei sDhjekting yung
meindz tu the illojikal and tediDs drujcri ov lcrning
tu rcad Inglish az spcld at prezent. Everithing they
hay tu lern in reading (or pronunsiasholl) and speling
iz irrashonal; ,vnl1 rule kontradikts the Dtller, and
each Rtateillent haz tn be akscpted siulpli on authoriti,

ON SPELLIXG.

147

and ,vith a komplete disregard ov all thozc rashonal
instinkts ,vhich lei dOrInant in the cheild, and ought
tu be a,vakend bei everi keind ov hclthi eksersciz.
Ei nó ther ar pcrsonz ,vho kan defend enHhing,
and ,vho hold that it iz diu tn this veri disiplin that
the Inglish karakter iz h wot it iz; that it retainz re-
spekt for authoriti; that it dvz not rek,yeir a rcazon
for everithing; and that it duz not admit that h,vot iz in-
konseivabel iz therefor imposibel. Even Inglish 01"-
thodoksi haz been trast bak tu thát hiden sourse,
bekauz a cheild akustomd tu believe that t-h-o-u-g-h
iz tho, and that t-h-r-o-u-g-h iz throo, wud afterwardz
believe enithing. It may be so; stil ei dout h ,vether
even such objekts ,vud justifei such meanz. Lord
Lytton scz, " A more lciing, round-about, puzel-hedcd
deluz110n than thát bei lnvich ,ve konfiúz the klcar
instinkts 0 v truth in our akursed sistenl ov spcling
woz never konkokted bei the father ov fols' hud. . . .
ROll kan a sistem ov ediukashon fInrish that beginz
bei so monstrns a folS"hud, Invich the sens ov hearing
snfeisez tu kontradikt?"
Though it may seem a ,vurk ov siupererogashon tu
bring for,vard stil lnore fakts in Sl)port ov the jcneral
kondemnashon past on Inglish speling, a fiu ekstrakts
fronl a pan1flet bei 1\11". 1\Ieiklcjohn, late Asistant-
Komishoner ov the Endoud Skoolz Komishon for
Skotland, may here feind a plase.
"Ther ar therteen diferent ,vayz ov reprezenting the
sound ov long 0 :-note, boat, toe, ye01nan, soul, row,
sew, hautboy, beau, owe, floor, oh! O!"
And agen (p. 16),

'ti' hick
truth
bough

" Double-you-aiteh-eye-see-aiteh
Tea-are- you - tea-ai teh
Bce-o-you-gcc-aiteh

148

ON SPELLING.

See-are-eh-bee
Bee-ec-eh-sce-aitch .
o h -yo u -gee-ai tcl1- tee
Oh-cnn-see-ee

trah
beach
ought
once

"Or, tu S])ll1 lip the hole indeitmcnt agenst the kvl-
prit: 1. Out ov the t,venti-siks leterz, onli eight a1'
true, fikst, and pern1anent k,volitiz-thát iz, are trne
both tu eí and ear. 2. Ther ar therti-eight distinkt
soundz in our spoken langwej; and ther ar about 400
distinkt sinlbolz (sinlpel and kOlll}>ound) tu reprezent
theze therti-eight soundz. In uther ,yurdz, ther ar
400 servants tu do the 'YIJrk ov thcrti-cight. 3. Ov
the t,venti-siks leterz, fifteen hay ak,yeird a habit ov
heiding then1selvz. They ar riten antI printed; bvt
the ear haz no akonnt ov thenl j such ar 'LV in wrong,
and gh in j'ight. 4. The vouel -soundz ar printed in
diferent ,vayz; a long 0, for ekz
unpel, haz thertcen
printed simbolz tu reprezent it. 5. Fourteen vouel
soundz hay 190 printed simbolz atácht tu their servis.
6. The singel vouel e haz feiv difcrellt fuukshonz; it
ought onli tu hay wun. 7. Ther a1' at least 1,300
\vurdz in h,vich the simbol and the sound ar at varians
--in h ,vich the ,vurd iz not sounded az it iz printed.
8. Ov theze 1,300, 800 ar monosilabelz-the kOlnonest
,vurdz, and Hl>pozed iu be eazier for children. . 9. The
hole h\ug,vej ov kuntri children leiz 'VitJlill theze
,yurdz; and 111eni agriknltinral lahorerz go fronl the
kradcl tu the grave ,vith a stok ov no more than 500
"TV I'd z."
The k,vestion, tllen, that ,vi] hay tu be anserd sooner
- or latcr iz this :-l{an this vnsisten1atik sistelll ov spel-
iug IngJish be aloud tu go on for ever? Iz evcri
Inglish cheild, az kon1pared ,yith 1>ther children, tu be
lli1Jlktcd in t\VO or three yearz ov h iz leif in order tu

ON SPELLING.

149

lern it? Ar the lo,ver ldasez tn go through skool
\vithout lerning tn read and rcit their O'Vll htng,vej in-
telijentli? And iz the kuutri tn pay Inilionz everi
year for this vter failinr ov nashonal cdi ukashon ?
Ei ùo not belicv that such a state ov thingz ,viI be
aloud tn kontiniu for ever, partikiularli az a rCllledi
iz at hand-a remidi that haz non be
n tested for
twenti or therti yearz, and that haz an
erd ekstremli
,vel. Ei mean 1\11'. Pitman'z sistcm ov fonetik reit-
ing, az apleid tu Inglish. Ei shalllot enter here intu
eni n1Ïniút diskushon ov fonetiks, or re-open the
kontroversi lnvich haz arizen bet,veen the ad vokets ov
difercnt sistemz ov fonetik reiting. Ov kourse, ther
ar diferent degreez ov ckselens in difercnt siste
z ov
fonetik speling; but even the 'YDrst ov theze sisten1z
iz infinitli siuperior tu the tradishollal speling.
Ei giv 1\11'. Pitman'z alfabet, h ,vieh komprehendz
the therti-siks broad tipikal soundz ov t.he Inglish
lang,vej, and aseinz tu each a definit seine 'Vith theze
thcrti-siks seinz, Inglish kan be riten rashonali and
red cazili; and, h\vot iz Inost important, it haz becn
proved bei an eksperiens ov ineni ycarz, bei niumerDs
publikashonz, and bei praktikal eksperilncnts in teach-
ing both children and adults, that such a sistem az
1\11'. Pitman'z iz pcrfcktli praktikal.

150

ON SPELLING.

TIlE PHO:NETIO ALPIIABET.

The phonetic letters in the first column are pronounced like the
italic letters in the words that follow. The last colullln contains
the mantes of the letters.

CONSONANTS. L'iquids.
lJlutes. L I fall..... ......... el
R r rare.... ......... ar
p p rope...... ...... pi Coalescents.
B b robe ...... ..... bi \v
T t fate ....... ...... ti w wet.......... .... WI;
D d fade ............ di Y y yet.. ...... ...... ye
ø g etch ......... ... çe Aspirate.
J j edge ...... ...... je H h hay. ............ eg
K k leek............. ke
G g league ......... ge VO,V'ELS.
Continuants. Guttural.
A a onl.. ............ at
F f safe. ...... ...... ef Ii B. alnls..... .......
a
V v sare. ...... ...... vi E e ell......... ...... at
H ß wreath......... it 8 E ale.. ............ E
a If wreathe. ...... ill I ill......... ...... it
S s lliss ......... ... es
eel......
........
Z z his.. ...... ...... zj Labial.
}1 I vicious......... if

g vision ......... 3i 0 0 on......... ...... ot
G) (b all... ...... ...... (t)
Nasals. Õ "S tip...... ......... '8t
M m seem... ......... enl e e ope.. ............ e
N n SQen ............ en U u full. ............ ut
U II si ng. ... .... ..... iu. y, 1L food ...... ...... tI.
DIPIITHO:KGS: EI ei, IU iu, OU ou, AI ai, 01 oi,
a:; Lcarù in by, new, now Kaiser, boy.

ON SPELLING.

151

[In the next fourteen pages, five of the new letters
will be employed, viz., a,
-' -Ð, 3, :g, for the sounds
represented by the italic letters ill father, SOll, hut,
thin, vision, sing.]

NOll ei ask eni intelijent readel' who d'5z not f'ÍJ] 1z
that everiÐiIJ niu and stranje iz, ipso facto, ridikiulo
and abs
rd, hwether after a fiu dayz' praktis, he or
she wud not read and reit I:gglish, akordi:g tu
lr.
Pitman'z sistel1I, with perfekt eaze? Ov kourse it
takes more than feiv nIinits tu master it, and nIore
than feiv minits tu form an opinion ov its merits.
Bot aùmitiIJ even that peopel ov a serten aje shud
feind this niu alfabet tr
bels
m, we m
st not forget
that no refofn1 kan be karid out without a jenera-
shon or two ov nlarterz; and hwot true reformerz
hay tu
iIJk ov iz not themselvz, b
t thoze who k-snl
after them-thoze, in fakt, who ar nou growiIJ
p tu
inherit hereafter, hwether they leik it or not, all the
gud and all the evil hwich we chooz tu lcav tu them.
It meit be sed, bouever, that 1\1r. Pibnan'z sistem,
beiIJ enteirli fonetik, iz too radikal a reform, and that
meni and the w
rst irregiularitiz in IIJglish speli:g
kud be removed without gOÏIJ kweit so far. The
prillsipel that haf a loaf iz beter than no bred iz not
without s
nl truÐ, and in rreni kasez we nó that a
polisi ov l\:omprOl1Ieiz haz been prod
ktiv ov veri gud
rez"Slts. B
t, on the
ther hand, this haf-harted
poli
i haz often retarded a real and kOlnplete reform
ov ekzistiIJ abiúsez; and in the kase ov a refornl ov

152

O SPELLIXG.

speliJ], ei ahuost dout hwether the difik"5ltiz inherent
in haf-me3lu'z ar not az great az the difilndtiz ov
kariiJ] a kOlnplete refOl'ln. If the w"5rlù iz not redi
for reforln, let ð"S wait. It seelllZ far betel', and at
all events far more onest, tu ,y<-lit til it iz redi than
tu l
ari the rel"ð ktant w
rld with you a litel ,yay, aud
then tu feind that all the Î1npIfIÜv forse iz spent, anù
the greater part ov the abiúsez establisht on feruler
ground than ever.
1\11'. Jones,* who reprezents the konsiliatori re-
forlnerz ov spelh], wud be satisfeiù "iih a nloderet
skeme ov spelil] rcfornl, in hwich, bei obzervÏ1] analoji
and folowiJ] preseùent in olteri1J a kornparatiyli slnalJ
n"5mber ov wIfrdz, it wud be posibel tu sÏ1nplifei 01'-
. tografi tu a konsiderabel ckstent without t:pleiil] cui
ruu prinsipel, or introdiÚsiJ] niu leterz, and yet tu 1'0-
diús the teÎ1n and labor in teachhJ readiJ] and speliIJ
bei at least wIfn-haf. It Ineit at all events Lo posibel
tu setel the speliJ] ov thoze two or three touzal1d
'VIfrdz h,yich at prezent ar speld difçrentli bci difereut
autoritiz. This sken1e, advokated bei 1\11'. J onos, iz
sertenli veri klever; and if it had a chans ov s"5kses,
ei meiself shad konsider it a great step in aùváns.

lei ol1li dout iz hwether, in a kase leik this, a slnall
11103ur ov rcfornl ,vad be kariù n10re oazili than a
kou1plete reforln. It iz diferent in Jerman, hwere
the di:seaz haz not spred so far. 11e1'e tho !{omíti

* Popular Eancation-A Rcyision of English SpcJling a Kational
Nece::;sity. Dy E. Joncs, D.A. Lonùon, 18ï5.

ON SPELLING.

153

apointed bei G"5vernment tu konsiJer the kwestion
ov a reforul ov spelilJ baz deklareù in favor uV S"ð"m
s"ð"ch Inoùe1'et prinsipelz. az
lr. Jones advokat
s for
IIJglish. In IIJgEsh, houever, the difik"ð"lti leiz in
chanjiJ] enit:il); and if the prinsipel ov eni chanje iz
Wð"ns admited, it wud 1'eali be eazier, ei believ, tu
begin de no
'o than tu chanje s
ln-éi1J, and leav the
rest "ð"nchanjed.
Let "ð"S nou see hou )\11'. Pitlnan'z or eni siIT'ilar
sisteln ov fonetik reiti1J baz w"ð"1'kt hwe1'e it haz been
put tu the test.

1J'. 'Villiam "\Vhite reits: "Ei speak froln ek-
speriens. Ei hay taught poor children in Gla8gow
tu read the SerIllon on the 1\lount after c1 kourse ov
ekse1'seizez ekstendi1J over no 11101'e than siks ourz."
The folowiIJ iz an ekstrakt froIl1 a leter riten Sð"m
teÏ1n ago bei the late 1\11'. 'Villialll Colbourne. manajer
ov the Dorset BalJk at Stð"rn1il1ster, .tu a frend ov
hiz a skoohnaster. lIe sez:-
"1\lei litel Siùney, who iz nou a fiu n1"5nts more
than four yearz o]ù, wil read eni fonetik buk without
the sleitest hezitasbon; the barde
t namez or the
101Jgest w"ð"rdz in the Old or Niu Testau1ent fOrin no
obstakel tu hin1. And hou 101J do you tilJk it tuk
111e (for ei anI hiz teacher) tu Ï1npart tu hiln this
pouer? II wei s
n1
i1J les than eight ourz ! You
ll1ay believ it or not, az you leik, b"ð"t ei am konfident
that not n101'e than that amount ov teilll woz spent
on him, and that woz in snachez ov feiv minits at a

154

ON SPELLING.

teiln, hweil tea woz getiIJ redi. Ei no you wil be
inkleind tu say, 'All that iz veri wel, b
t hwot iz
the use ov readiIJ fonetik buks? he iz stÍl az far of,
and n1ay be farther, frolll readiIj rOlnanik buks.' B
t
in thig you ar Inistaken. Take anð"ther ekz
unpel.
I-liz nekst elder brIftber, a boi ov siks yearz, haz had
a fonetik ediukashon so far. II wot iz the kOll
C-
kwens? I-Iwei, reaùiIj in the ferst staje woz so ùe-
leitful and eazi a tilJ tu him that he taught hin1self
tu read rOlnanikali, and it wud be a difikIflt Inater
tu feind wsn boi in twenti, ov a korespol1diIj aje, that
kuù read haf so wel az he 1\:<111 in eni buk. Agcn,
ll1ei oldest boi haz riten more fonetik shorthand and
10Ijhand, perhaps, than eni boi ov hiz aje (eleven
yearz) in the IdIJdom; and nOWð"n ei daresay haz
had les tu do with that abs"5rditi ov absð"rditiz, the
spelilJ-buk ! lIe iz nou at a ferst-rate skool in 'Vilt-
shire, and in the haC-year presedilJ Kristn1as, he
karid of the preiz for orÐogl"afi in a kontest with
boiz Sð"111 ov thelll biz seniorz bei yearz I"
Dei the adopshon ov the fonetik alfabet, the difi-
kð"ltiz that lei in the way ov forenerz lerniIJ IIJglish,
also wud be dð"n away with. The Rev. Newman
IIall reits, '(Ei met with a Danish jentelman the

ther day ,vho heili preizd the IIJglish fonotipik Niu
Testament. It had been ov great use tu him, and
eJlélbeld h ÙJl tll 'read [buks in the leonlon 8]JeliyJ
without /Ul in8tr
lcter, ren10viI] the greatest obsta-
kel in akweiriIj IIJglish, the monstr
s anomali3 ov

ON SPELLING.

155

p1'on
nsiashon." Ekzalnpelz leik theze go a 10IJ
way.
1\11'. A. J. Ellis, than w hOlli nowð11 haz labord
more devotidli for a reform ov speliIJ, az a ferst step
in a refonn ov nashonal ediukäsholl, and who haz
himself elaborated several ITIOst injenið"s sisten1z ov
fonetik reitiIJ, givz IfS the folowÌ1] az the rezð"ltz ov
hiz praktikal eksperiens:
,,, 'Vith the fonetik sistem ov speliJ], the Primer iz
trasterd within -tree mIfnPs at most. The children
then proseed tu praktis this fonetik readiJ] for E
ln
teiln, til they kan read with fluensi frolll the jelleral
luk ov the wIfrd, and not froin konsideriIJ the pouerz
ov its leterz. Rree llfsnts nloro, at most, a1' re-
kweird fõr this stL
e.
" If wen this pouer ov fluent readig in fonetik print
iz akweird, buks in the ordinari print, siuted tu their
kapasitiz, ar tu be put intu the children'z handz
and theyar tolù tu read theln. Each wIfrd hwich
they fail tu ges iz told then1 immedietli; but it iz
found that children ar mostli abel tu read the ordillari
print without eni fð"rther instrIfkE;hon. The trilll
ncsesari for kOll1pletiIJ this step may be taken, at
the 101Jgest, az two lllIfnts,
o that the hole teill1 ov
lernilJ tu reaù in the ordinari print, on the ReadÏJ]
Reforll1 si
telll, may be rekond az feiv ourz a week
for eight lll
nfJR. The hole t'1sk haz, in llleni kasez,
been akomplisht in les toiln, even in -Ðree lllð"n
s. On
the ð"ther hand, in Wð"n 81\:001 bwere it iz uzed, eleven

156

OY SPELLING.

DlsnBs ar okiupeiù, az the Ulaster feiuùz it atlvan-
tajss in sther respekts tu keep the piupil 101Jger at
fonetik reaÙil) Bst ollli WSll our a day iz rekweirù."
1\11'. Ellis S"51nZ sp az folowz :
"I{areful eksperiulel1ts in teachiI) children ov varis3
ajez anl raIJks, anù even pauperz and krirnillal aùslts,
hay establi
ht-
"1. That piupilz lllay be taught tu read buks in
fonetik print, slowli bst shureli, in frolH ton tu forti
ourz, and wil atain kOl1::;iùerabel fluel1si after a fiu
week::;' praktis.
"2. That hwen the piupilz hay ataind fluellsi in
reaùilJ fronl fonotik print, a veri fiu ourz wil sð"feis
tu giv theul the same fluensi in rcadil) ordinari print.
"3. That the hole teiln nesesari for Ï1npartiJ) a no-
lej ov boÐ fonetik anù ordinari readil) dsz not ekseed
eight lllsn-Bs for chilJren ov averej illtelijens, between
four and feiv yearz ov aje, taught in klas, at sl
ooJ,
not more than har-an-our tu an our each dfiY; and
that in this teim an abiliti tu read iz akweil'd siuperior
tu that u3ua1i atainù in two or t'ree teilnz the perioJ.
on the old plan; hweil the pronsnsiashon ov the
piupil iz msch .inlproved, hiz interest in biz stð"di iz
kept aleiv, and a lojikal trainil) ov cnJiuri1) valiu iz
givcn tu hiz llleind bei the babitiual analisis and sin-
tesiB ov spoken
oundz.
"4. That thoze taught tu read in this maner akweir
the art ov ord.inari spe1iIJ more ret1ili thall thoze ia-
strskted on tho old n1ctod."

ON SPELLIXG.

157

Tu all who no 1\lr. A. J. Ellis, this evidens wi! be
be sð"fishent az tu the praktikal usefulnes ov the
Fonetik Sistem ov speliIJ. Tu thoze who wi
h for
nlore evidens ei rekolnenù a palnflet bei 1\11'. G.
Withers,
'The IIJglish LrrlJgwej Spelù az Pro-
nounst," 1874; aud Wð"n bei Dr. J. \V. 1\Iartin,
"The Gordian Not I(ð"t," 1875, hwere they wil feind
the konkð"rent testÏ1noni ov praktikal teacherz in
IIJgland, Skotland, Eirlanù, and Alnerika, all agreeiIJ
that, boiJ az a praktikal and a lojikal trainiIJ, the
Fonetik Sistenl haz proved the greatest s
kses.
Ther reruainz, therefor, this Wðl1 objekshon onli,
that hwotever the praktikal, and hwotever the reoret-
ikal advantejez ov the fonetik sistenl Inay be, it wud
sterli destroi the historikal or etirllolojikal karakter
ov the IIJglish laIJgwej.
Sð"poze it did; hwot then? The Reformashon iz
sspozed tu hay destroid the historikal karakter ov
the IIJglish Chsrch, and that sentinlental grievans iz
stil felt bei ssm stiudents ov eldeziastikal
ntikwitiz.
Est did IIJgland, did all the reali progresiv nashonz
ov Europe, alou this sentimental grievans tu out-
weigh the pmktikal and -Ðeoretikal advant
iez ov
Protestant Reform? LaIJgwej iz not Inade for skolarz
and etimolojists; and if the hole rase ov Il)gli
h
etilnolojists wer reali tu be swept away bei the in-
trodskshon ov a SpeliIJ Reform, ei hope they wnJ be
the f erst tu rejois in sakrifeiziIJ thelnselvz in so gnd
a kauz.

158

ON SPELLING.

Bst iz it reali the kase that the historikal kon-
tiniúiti ov the IIJglish lalJgwej wud bei broken bei the
adopshon ov fonetik spelilj, anù that the profesholl
ov the etimolojist wud be gon for ever? Ei say No,
most emfatikali, tu boÐ propozishonz. If the seiens
ov laIJgwej haz proved enitil
), it haz proved that all
1a1Jgwejez chanje akordiIJ tu law, and with konsiderabel
uniforn1Îti. If, therefor, the reitiIJ folowd,pari passu,
on the chanjez in pronð"nsiashon, hwot Ìz kalld the
etin1010jikal konshð"snes ov the speakerz and the read-
erz-ei speak, ov kourse, ov ediukated peopel onIi
-wud not sð"fer in the least. If we retain the feeliIJ
ov an etimolojikal konek
hon between gentle}}
allly
and gentle}}
anlike, we sbud sbureli l:etain it hwether
we reit gentlel1
anly or .qentebnanli. If we feel that
tllink and tllollgllt, òring and brought, òuy and
bonglit, freight and fraught, beloIJ tugether, shud
we feel it les if we rote tGJf, brGJt, bGJt} frot 9 If, in
speakilJ thoze who no Latin retain the feeliIJ that
WIfrdz enùiIJ in -aiion korespond tu Latin wð"rdz in
-illio, wuù they looz the feeli-I] if they saw the S
llne
wð"rdz spelù with ifon, or even "-eJð"n?" Do they
not rekogneiz Latin -itia in-ice; or -ilis in -Ie, az in
-able (Latin abilis) 9 If the skolar noz, at Wð"ns,
that sð"ch w
rdz az barbarolls, anxious, circus,
genius, ar ov Latin orijin, wud he hezitate if the l:lst
silabel in all ov them wer unifornlli riten "IfS?" Nay,
iz not the prezent speliIJ ov barbarous and anxious
enteil'li InisleadiIJ, bei kOllroundiIJ wð"rùz endilJ in

ON SPELLI.KG.

159

-OSllS, s
ch az jalnolls (fa1J
osus) with w
rdz endiIJ
in -Zl
, leik barbarous, anxious, ets. ? Bekauz the
Italianz reit filo8ofo, ar they les aware tban the
IIJglish, who reit jJhilo8opher, and the :French, who
reit philo8ophe, that they hav before thenl the Latin
ph ilo8ophlt8, the Greek Cf!Àóao'foç? If we reit f in
faJl8i, hwei not in phänto1Jl GJ If in../reJlz!I and .fran-
tic, hwei not in phrenolo!J!J?- A laIjgwej hwich tolerates
vial for lJltial, need not shiver at jilosofer. Everi
eidiukated speaker nóz that s
ch w
rdz az Ilonollr,
ardollr, colour, odour, laóour, 'vigour, error, eJ}l-
peror, bav past tronl La
in tu French, anù frolll
French tu IIJglish. 'tV ud he nó it les if all wer speld
aleik, sð"ch az onor (onorable), ardor, v(qor (vigor-
ous), labor (laborious), or even "onID', ardð"r,
vigð"r?" The old spcliIJ ov enperor, doctor, .qov-
ernor, and error, woz enperollr, doctoltr, gov-
ernOllr, and errOltr. If theze kud be chanjed, bwei
not the rest? Spenser baz neióor for neigllbor, and
it iz difikð"lt tu say hwot \Voz gaind bei chanjiIj -bor
intu -bollr in s
ch piurli Sakson Wð"rdz az neigltbor,
harbor. No dout if we see laugh riten with gh at
the end, thoze who nó J ernlan ar at Wð"ns remeinded
ov its etimolojikal koneksbon with the Jerman lachen ;
b
t we shud soon nó tbe &llne bei anaJoji, if we found
not orùi ,. laf," bð"t "kof" for cough (Jerman,
keuchen), (, en
f" for enough (Jerman, genug),
ets. In" draft," fonetik speliIJ haz nearli sð"planted
the so-kalld historikal spelilJ drauglzt,. in "dwarf"

160

ON SPELLING.

(dwergh, tkweorll) and in "ruff" (roîtgll), altu-
gether.
II wot peopel kall the etin olojikal kOl1shIfSnes ov
the speaker iz striktli a mater ov oratorikal senti-
ment anli, and it wud relnain nearli az strolJ az it iz
nou, hwotever speli1J be adopted. Est even if it
shud sIffer here and there, we ought tu bear in meind
that, eksept for oratorikal pIfrposez, that konshIfsnes,
konfeind az it iz tu a veri fiu ediukated peopel, iz ov
veri sn1all Ì1nportans, Ifnles it haz ferst been korekted
bei a stlikt etimolojikal disiplin. 'Vithout that, it
often dejenerates il1tu hwot iz kalld "popiular eti-
moloji," aliù aktiuali tenùz, in S
Ill kasez, tu vishiJte
the korekt spelÌlJ ov wIfrdz.
Ei ha v frekwentli dwelt on this before, in order tu
show hou, hwot iz nou kalld the etimolojikal or his-
torikal speliIj ov wIfrdz iz, in meni kasez,
terli ð"n-
etimolQjikal and Ifnhistorikal. We spel to delzgllt,
and thss indiÚs meni peopel tu believ that this wð"rd
iz sIfmhou konekted with light llux], or light [levis] ;
hwe1'eaz the old spcli1J woz to del!!t or to delite
(Tyndale), reprezentiIj the old French deleiter. On
the Ifther hand, we feind for quite and snure, the
old spelilJ fjltight, s1nigh,f, hwich may be old and.
historikal, bð"t iz deseidedli ð"netimolojikal.
Sovereign and foreign ar speld az if they wer
konekted with reign, regnll1n,. the true etimoloji ov
the forn1e1' beïIj slljJeran1ls, Old French, SO'V1Ylin, Old
IIJglish, soveraine,. h \Veil fore(qn iz the late Latin

ON SPELLING.

161

jorane1ls" Old French fora in ,. Old IIJglish forein.
And hwei du we reit to feign 9 Archbishop Trench
(" IIJglish Past and Prezent," p. 238) -biIJks the g
in feign iz elokwent tu the eí; b"5t its elokwens iz
misleadilJ. Feign iz not taken froD1 Latin jingo, az
litel az n.ono1lr iz taken frolll Latin n.onor. Feign
k"5mz froD1 the Old French faindre,. it woz in Old
IIJglish faynen and feynen, and it woz therefor a
mere etimolojikal feint tu insert the .q ov the Latin
jingo, and the French .feignant. The Old IlJgli
h
slla lJunfasst (Orm.), forlllù leik 8ted
fasst (stcdfast),
iz nou speld sna1T
efaced, az if it had s"5lntiIJ tu do
with a bl"5shilJ rase. Agllast, insted ov Old IIJglish
agast, iz s"5pozed tu luk D10re freitful bekauz it re-
meindz '5S ov gn.ost. The French lanterne woz
riten lant-horn, az if it had been so .kalld from the
transparent sheets ov horn that enklozcd the leit.
The s in island owez its orijin tu a
istaken belief
that the W"5rd iz konckted with isle (insztla), hwereaz
it iz the AIJglo-Sakson eáiåJld (J erlnan eiland), that
iz, water-land. The speliIJ iland woz stil k"5rcnt in
Shakspere'z teÏln. In aisle, too, the s iz '5netilllo-
lojikal, though it iz bistorikal, az haviIJ been taken
over froD1 the Old French aisle.
This tendensi tu olter the speliIJ in order tu impart
tu a w"5n1, at all hazardz, an etiInolojikal karakter,
beginz even in Latin, hwere postlonus, a siupf'rlativ
ov 1Jos/, woz s"5mteinlz riten lJOstl111/Jnus, az if, hwen
apleid tu a late-born S"5n-, it woz dereiv J from luunns.
VOL. v. 11

lG2

ON SPELLIXG.

In IlJglish, this fols speli1J iz retaind in lJOsthu1nolls.
Gena woz speld bei peopel who wonted tu show their
nolej ov Greek cæna, az if konekted with y.o'}.I
,
h wich it iz not.
Bð"t nou let ð"S Iuk more karefuli intu the far more
Ílnportant statement, thåt the IIJglish laIJgwej, if riten
fOl1etikali, wud reali Iooz its historikal and etin10-
Iojikal karakter. The ferst kwestion iz, in hwot sens
kan the prezent speliIJ ov IIJglish be kalld historikal?
We hay onli tu go bak a yeri short way in order tu
see the modern ð"pstart karakter ov hwot iz kalid
historikal speliIJ. \Ve nou reit pleasure, 1neasllre,
anù featltel'", bð"t not veri 10IJ ago, in Spenser'z teÍln,
theze w
rdz wer speld plesll're, Jnesure, jetlter. Tyn-
dale rote jrnte,. the i in fruit iz a lnere restora-
shon ov the French spe1i1J. For debt, on the kon-
trari, we feind, bð"t tree or four hð"ndred yearz ago,
d elt. This iz n10re historikal therefor than debt, be-
kauz in French, froln hwich the wð"rd woz borowd,
the b had disapearù, and it woz a piurli etimolojikal
fansi tu restore it. The ó woz Ieikweiz re-introdiúst
in douót, b
t the 1) ,voz not restored in tzt kount
(French co 1JLjJter, Latin co 71'qnltare), hwere p had
at ]east the same reit az b in do II te. Thð"s receipt
rezi(llnz the Latin p, bð"t deceit dð"z without it. Tu
deign k<icps the lJ, tu disdain àð"Z without it. Ther
iz anð"ther b hwich haz a serten historikal air in
ssn1 IIJglish wð"rdz, bð"t hwich woz orijillali piurli
fonetik, and iz nou silnpli siupérfJuð"s. The old Wð"rd

ON SPELLING.

163

for 1nen
óer \VOZ lhn. In s"5ch konlpoundz az lirn-
l(una, lim(b )-lame; lirn-leas, litu(b )-less; it woz
inlposibel tu avoid the interkalashon ov a b in pro-
n"5nsiashon. In this maner the ó krept in, and we
hay nou tu teach that in liJnó, CrZt1nÓ ( crume), tlut7nb
(thuma), the ó lll"5St be riten, b"5t not pronoúnst.
Agen, tung (Jefll1an zltnge), !lung (Jerlllan jltng),
az spelù bei Spenser, hay a far more historikal aspekt
than tongue and YOltllg.
If we wisht tu reit historikali, we ought tu reit
salin insted ov psabn, for the inishal p, beÏIJ lost
in pron"5nsiashon, woz dropt in reitiIJ at a veri erli
teill1 (AIJglo-Sakson sealin), and woz re-introdiúst
silnpli tu pleaz S"5nl eldeziastikal etÎ1nolojists; also
neveîV (French nevezt) insted ov nejJh.ew, hwich iz
both "8"uetimoloJ ikal and "5nfonetik.
In hwot sens kan it be kalld historikal speliIJ if the
old pluralz ov mOîtSe anù lOllse, hwich wer rnys and
lys, ar non speld l1
ice and lice? The plural ov goose
iz not speld geece b
t geese, yet everibodi nóz hOLL tu
pronoúns it. The same mistaken atempt at an oka-
zhonal fonetik speliIJ haz separated rtice from die,
and pence from jJens, thát iz, }Jenyes,. hweil in nurse,
hwere the speliIJ nurce ,vud hav been useful az re-
meindiIJ "58 ov its true etimon nourrice, the c haz
been replast bei s.
Ther aI', in fakt, meni speliIJz hwich wud be at
the same teim more historikal anù more fonetik.
IIwci reit little, hwen nOW"5n pronoÚnsez little, and

164

ON SPELLIXG.

hwen the old spelig woz lytel? I-Iwei girdle, hwen
the old spelilJ woz girdel] The same rule apleiz tu
nearli all w"5rdz endiIJ in le, S"5ch az sickle, ladle,
alple, ets., hwere the etimoloji iz kompleteli obskiÚl'd
bei the prezent or
ografi. I-Iwei scent, b"5t dis
ent,
hwen even 1\lilton stil rote sent? Hwei ache, illsted
ov the Shaksperian ake 9 I-Iwei cat, b"5t kitten,.
bwei cow, b"ðt kine 9 I-Iwei accede, precede, secede,
b"5t exceed,lJroceed, sltcceell? I-Iwei, indeed, eksept
tu waste the presh"5s teÏ1n ov chilùren?
And if it iz difik"5lt tu say hwot konstitiuts his-
tol'ikal speliIJ, it iz ekwali perpleksilJ tu defeill the
real meaniIJ ov etimolojikal speliIJ. For hwel'e a1' we
tu stop? It wud be konsiderd veri "5ueti!llolojikal
wer \ve tu l'eit nee insted ov knee, now insted ov
knolv, nigltt insted ov knight,. yet nOW"5n k0111-
plainz about the los ov the inishal It, the reprezent-
ativ ov an orijinal k, in loaf, A. S. hlâf (cr. xJ.iß(1])oç),
in rin.q (A. S. !iring),. in lade, ladder, neck, ets.
If we ar tu reit etilnolojikali, then Lwei not 1'e-
t"5rl1 tu locerd, or Itl(
ford, insted ov lord? tu nose-
thrill, or noseth.irle insted ov nostril,. tu slvÙ5ter
insted ov sister,. hwich wud not be n10re tr"5bels"5Hl
than sword. r
fl1tann shureli wud be betel' than
1[V01nan,. rneadlvffe beter than 1nidwife,.' godsjJel
betel' than 9oslJel, ortyard betel' than orchatll,
puisne betel' than pun!}. Frekwentli the prezcnt
rekogneizd speliIJ luks etimolojikal, b"5t iz "5terli 511-
etÏ1l1olojikal. Righteous Iuks leik an ajektiv in -eoltS,

ON SPELLING.

165

s
ch az plenteous, b"ð"t it iz reali a Sakson w
rd,
r igkt'w is, thát iz riglli'wise, fonnd leik otllerwise,
ets.
Coztld iz riten with an 1 in analoji tu wouid, b
t
hweil the l iz j
stifeid in would fronl will, and
sllollld from sk,all we feind the Old I1Jglish Ï111per-
fekt ov can riten clttk.e, then c01ltlle, coud e. The
I, therefor, iz neither fonetik nor etimoloj ikal. N
-
-ÐilJ, agen, kan be more ll1isieadiIj tu an etiInolojist
than the prezent speliIj ov ttvhole and kale. Both
k
m from the same sourse, the Gotik kail-s, Sanskrit
kalya-s, ll1eaniIj orijinali, fit, redi,. then sound,
cOl1zplete, whole. In AIjglo-Sakson we hay hæl,
hole; and llal, hel
i, without eni trase ov a
v, either
before or after. The Old IIJglish llalsltJn, holes
ln,
iz the Jerman kailsa}n. TVllole, therefor, iz a n1ere
mis-speliIJ the w haviIJ probabli been aded in analoji
tu wk.o, wlticll, ets. From a piurli etirnolojikal point
ov viu, the w iz rOIJli left out before It in lion,. for az
AIJglo-Sakson hwy bekame ttvhy, A1Jglo-Sakson lnv((;
shud hay bek
m ttvllow.
If we re
li atempted tu reit etimolojikali, we shud
hay tu reit bridegrooln without the r, bekauz .qroorn
iz a mere kor
pshon ov gttlna, man, AIJglo-Sakson
bryd-gltn
a. We shud hay tu reit burse insted ov
purse, az in disónrse. In fakt, it iz difik
lt tu say
hwere we shud stop. Hwei do we not reit 1netal in-
sted ov mettle,
vorthshiJ) insted ov worship, ck,i-
rnrgeon insted ov surgeon, fUJ'hlonfJ (thát iz, f
ro'v

lG6

ON SPELLING.

101]) insted ov .furlong, feordÞing (thát iz fourÐ
part) insted ov fartlling ? If we reit piuni lJuisne,
we meit az wel reit post-natus. 'Ve n1eit spel koi,
quietus,. pert, apertus,. priest, presbyter,. 111aster,
1nagister,. sekston, sacristan,. ahns, elee1JlOsyne,
ets. If enibodi wil tel me at hwot date etimolojikal
speliIJ iz tu begin, hwether at 1,500 A. D., or at
1,000 A. D., or 500 A. D., ei am wiliIJ tu disk&s
the kwestion. Til then, ei beg leav tu say that eti-
molojikal speliIJ wud play greater havok in IIJgli8h
than fonetik speliIJ, even if we wer tu draw a lein not
more than feiv hð"ndred yearz ago.
The two stroIJgest argiuments, therefor, agenst
fonetik speliIJ, nalneli, that it wud destroi the his-
torikal and etimolojikal karakter ov the IIJglish hUJg-
\vej, ar, after all, b
t veri parshali true. I-Iere and
there, no dout, the etÎ1noloji and bistori ov an IIJg1ish
w
rd meit be obskiúrd bei fonetik speliIJ; az if, for
instans, we rote "Y lLO'P " insted ov EurolJe. B
t
even then analoji wud help
S, and teach thoze who
nó Greek, ov whom ther ar not meni, that "Y llr "
in sð"ch wð"rdz az Europe, Eurydice, reprezented the
Greek EÙpÚÇ. The real anser, houever, iz, that no-
'Vð"n kud onestli kall the prezent sistem ov speliIJ
either historikal or etÎ1nolojikaI; and, ei believ, that,
taken az a hole, the los oka3ond bei konsistent fo-
netik speliIJ wud not be greater than the gain.
An
tber objekshon '5ljd agenst fonetik speliIJ,
nameli, that with it it wud be in1posibel tu disti1Jgwish

ON SPELLING.

IG7

hOlllonÏInz, lll
st be n1et in the same way. No dout
it iz a serten aùvantej if in reitiIJ we kan distiIJgwisb
rig
t, rite, {write, and wrigllt. B
t if, in the h
ri
ov konversashon, ther iz hardli ever a dout hwich
w
rd iz nlent, shureli ther ,,'ud be lll"5ch les danjer
in the slow proses ov readitJ a kontiniu
s sentens.
If vari
s speliIJz ov the same w"5rd ar nesesari tu
point out diferent meaniIJz, we shud rekweir eight
speliIJz for box, tu signifei a chest, a Kristmas gift,
a h
ntiIJ seat, a tree, a slap, tu sail round, seats in a
iJeater, and the fr"5nt seat on a koach; and this prin-
sipel wud bav tu be apleid eu ab"5v 400 w"5rdz.
Who wud "5ndertake tu proveid all tbeze variashollz
ov the prezent uniform speliIJ ov theze w
rdz ? And
we m
st not forget that, after all, in readiIJ a paje we
ar selùom in dout bwetber sole n1ean? a fish, or the
sole ov a fut, or iz u
ed az an ajektiv. If ther iz
at eni teim eni real difik"51ti, laIJgwej pl'oveidz its own
rellledi. It either drops s"5ch w"5rdz az rite and sole,
replasiI] them bei serel1lony and only, or it uzez a
perifrastik ekspreshon, s"5ch az the sole ov the fut,
or the sole and ol1li ground, ets.

[Five other ne,v letters, representing the long vow-
els, ,viII now be. introduced, namely

b ill,

for the sounds heard in
they, field, saw, no,
mate, see, call, core,
mare, police, ough t, coal,

do,
true,
poor.]

Th
s far ei hay treid tu an
er the ria1i irnportant

lö

ON SPELLING.

argiuITIents hwich hay bin brmt forwarù agenst fo-
netik speliIJ. Ei hay dð"n be with speshal referens
tu the pouerful relllollstransez ov Archbishop Trench,
and biz mest Ebel p1idiIJ in fEvor QV the es1ablisht
sistem ov ortografi. Az a Dlir skolar, ei fuli shEr
hiz filiIJz, and ei sinsirli adIl1eir biz elokwent advo-
kasi. Ei difer frotll hinl bekruz ei dtt not tink, az
hi dð"z, that the los entEld bei fonetik spelilJ wud bi
se grEt az wi iInajin; or that it wud bi rol on W-Sll
seide Beseidz, -snles hi kan sbe hou a reform ov spel-
iIJ iz not snli for the p1'ezent tu bi avoided, b
t mltu-
getber tu bi renùerù -snnesesari, ei konsider that the
sttner it iz tEken in band the beter. It siU1Z tu JUi
that the Archbishop luks on the introd-skshon ov
fonetik speliI] az a Inir krocbet ov a fiu skolarz, or
az an ateD1pt on the part ov S-SD1 haf-et1iuketed per-
SODZ, wishiIJ tu avoid the tr
bel ov lerniIJ bOll tu spel
korektli. If that wer se, ei kweit agri with hin1 that
p-sblik opinion wud never af:,iúm s-sÍÍshent fors for
karii1J thEr skim. Bð"t ther iz a metiv pouer beheilld
thi z fenetik refol'lnerz hwÍch the Archbishop haz
bardli tekcn intu akount. Ei luin the n1izeri en-
diÚrd bei milionz ov chilùren at sInd, hll n1eit lern
ill W"5D yir, and with rial advantej tu thelTIselvz, hwot
thE nou rekweir fer or feiv yirz tu lern, and seldom
Sð"kSid in lernÌ1J after rol. If the evidens ov s
ch
men az 1\11'. Ellis iz tu bi depended on, and ei beliv
hi iz wilÎ1J tu s-sbmit tu eni te
t, then shllrli the los
ov S"5111 historikal anù etirnolojikal sOlll'enirs wud be

ON SPELLING.

169

litel agenst the hapines ov lnilionz ov children, and
the stil heier hapines ov 111Ïlionz ov IIJglisblnen and
IIJglisewimen, greiIJ
p az the Erz tu rol the welß
and streIJ Ð ov IIJglish literatiur, or ð"nsbel tu rid
iven thsr Beibel. IIiI' it iz bwer ei ventiur tu diler
from the Archbishop, not az biiIJ saIJgwin az tu cni
imlnidiet sð"kses, bð"t simpli àZ filiIJ it a diuti tu help
in a kroz bwich at prezent iz n1est "5upopiular. The
ivil de mE bi put of for a lOIJ tein1, partikiularli if
the wet. ov s
ùh lncn az Archbishop Trench iz tron
intu the "5ther skd. B"ð"t <5nles laIJgwej sisez tu bi
laIJgwej, and reitiIJ sisez tu bi reitiIJ, the dE wil
shltrli kðm hwen pis wil hay tll bi msd bctwin the
t1Í. J ermani haz apointed a G
vernlnent I{.omishon
tu konsider hwot iz tu bi d"5n with J ernlan speliIJ
In Amerika, tll, S"5m IidiIJ ststsmen sin! inkleind tu
tsk
p the reform ov speliIJ on nashonal groundz.
Iz ther ne ststsman in IIJgland s"5fishentli prqf agenst
ridikiul tu krol the atensbon ov Parliment tu hwot iz
a greiIJ misfortiun?
lVlð"ch, houever, az ei difer from the Archbishop
on thiz groundz, ei kanot b"5t deprekEt th ten in
hwich biz pouerful opozishon ház bin met. bei 111eni
ov the "5phelderz ov fenetik speliIJ. N s, ei m"5st go
stil f"ð"liher, and fraI] k1i kOl1fés that tu W
n ov hiz
argiuments ei feind it difik
lt, at prezent, tu giv a
satisfaktori anser.
"It iz a mil' as"5mpshon," the Archbishop re-
marks, "that rol Inen pronoúns rol w"ð"rdz aleik; or

170

ON SPELLING.

that hwenever the k
m tu spel a w
rd the wiI ekzaktli
agri az tu hwot the outlein ov its sound iz. N ou wi
ar shltr men wil not dq this, from the fakt that, be-
fer ther woz eni fikst and seteld ortografi in our
laIJgwej, hwen, therfor, everibodi woz mer or les a
a fenografer, si1uIJ tu reit doun the w
rd az it sounded
tu llÏ1n,-for hi had ne 'l)ther 1m tu geid him,- the
v8riEshonz ov speliIJ ar infinit. TEk, for instans, the
W'l)rd s1tdden, hwich d
z not sim tu promis eni grEt
skep for vareieti. Ei hav meiself met with this w
rd
speid in ne les than fértin WEZ an1"5IJ our erli reiterz.
Agen, in hou meni WEZ woz Raleigh'z Dell speId, or
Shakspere'z? The sem iz evident from the speliIJ
ov
nediukated personz in our en d? The hay ne

ther rQl bst the sound tu geid them. Rou
z it
that the dq not rol spel aIeik?" IVg1ish, Past and
PreEent, p. 203.
Leik mest men hq plid with ther hart az wel az
with thEr hed, the Archbishop haz hiI' everlukt W"5n
obvi
s anser tu biz kwestion. The dlt not spel aleik
bekmz thE bav bin brrot
with a sistem ov speliIJ
in hwich the 88m sound kafl bi reprezented in ten
diferent wez, and in hwich hardli eni w
n leter iz
restrikted tu W
n fonetik pouer onli. If children
wer br
t
p with an alfabet in hwìch ich leter had
b
t W
n sound, and in hwich the SEm sound woz
rolwez reprezented bei the Sfll sein-and this iz the
veri esens ov fenetik reitiIj-then it wud bi sÎJnpli

ON SPELLING.

171

inlposibel that thE shuù drinl ov reitiIj sudden in fer-
tin, or IVoburn in 140, diferent WEZ.
Bð"t for rol thát ther iz Sð"m trq-Ð in the Arch-
bishop's remark; and if wi kOlnpEr the tliferent WEZ
in hwich the advokets ov fenetik speliIj-nlen leik
Pitman, Bell, Ellis, Withers, J ones- reit the 8Em
wð"rdz, iven hwen YltziIJ the SEm fonetik alfabet, wi
shal si that the difik
lti pointed out bei the Arch-
bishop iz a rial w
n. Everiw
n ne.z hon diferentli
the SEm w
rdz rolwEz hay bin and stil ar pronoúnst
in diferent parts ov IIJgland. And it iz not ollli in
tounz and kountiz that thiz pekiuliaritiz prevEI; ther
ar serten w
rdz hwich w
n famili pronoúnsez difer-
entli froln an
ther; and ther ar beseidz the st
did
and
nst
did pekiuliaritiz ov individiual spikerz. Tu
konvíns pipel that Wð"n pron
nsiEshon iz reit and the

ther rOIJ, sþnz ð"terli hopies. Ei hay herd a heili
k
1tivEted man defendiIJ hiz dropiIJ the It at the be-
giniIJ ov serten w
rdz, bei the
nanserabel argiu-
ment that in tie pIEs hWEr hi woz brrot
p, new
n
pronoúnst thiz illishal hz. If wot Skochnlan wud
. admit that hiz pronð"nsiEshon ,voz frolti? I-Iwot
Eirishman wud s
bmit tu Iroz ov speIiIJ past in Lð"n-
don? And hwot renderz argiulnent on eni neisetiz
ov pronð"nsiEshon stil mor difik
1t iz, that be-Ð the ir
and the t
IJ ar mest trecherð"s witnesez. Ei hav he
d
Amerikanz mEntEn in gud ernest that ther woz m
ch
les of nEzai twaIJ in Amerika than in IIJgland. Pipel
ar not aWEr ho:u thE pronoúns, and hou diferentli thE

172

ON SPELLING.

pronoúns Wð"n and the S8m wð"rd. Az a forener ei
hav had alupel oportiunitiz for obzerv8shon on this
point. S"Sll1 frenùz wud tel mi, for instans, that
1.vorld woz pronoúnst leik wltirl'd, fatlter leik fal'-
titer, nor (befer konsonants) leik gn(l'lÐ, bud leik
bird, burst leik bust, for leik fill', birtlt leik bel'tlt,.
that the vouelz ha1 the S8111 sound in wltere and
were, in not and war, in God and gaudy,. hweil

therz ashqrd mi that nOWð"n b
t a forener kud tiIJk
so. Anù the w
rst iz that iven the SEm person ù
z
not rolwEz pronoúns the S81n w
rd in ekzaktli the
88m maner. I(onstantli, hwen ei askt a frend tu
repit a w
rd hwich hi had j
st pronoúllst, hi wud
pronoúns it agen, bð"t with a sleit diferens. The mil"
fakt ov hiz treiiIJ tu pronoúns wel wud give tu hiz
pron
nsiEshon a konshð"s and emfa tik karakter. The
prepozish on of iz pronoúnst bei most Plpel Ol', bð"t
if kl"os-ekzan1Índ, meni wiI SE that thE pronoúns ov,
b
t the 0 not ekzaktli leik off.
The konfiu30n bek
mz gr8test hwen it iz atempted
tu eiùentifei the pron
nsiEshon, BE ov a vouel in Jer-
man with a vouel in IIJglish. N e t-q IIJglishmen and
no t1Í J erll1anZ silnd tu bi Ebel tu agri on hwot th8
herd with tLlEr irz, or hwot th8 sed with thEr t
lJz ;
and the rez
lt in thé end iz that no vouel in J errran
woz riali the 88m az eni
ther vouel in IIJglish. Tu
tEk '

n or tlÍ instansez, fronl 1\lr. Ellis'z ki tu Palio-
teip (Palætype)49 ei kan hir no diferens betwi n the a
_ in Italian mano, IlJglish fatllel', and Jerman 1naltnen,

ON SPELLI:KG.

173

nles ei restrikt n1ei obzerVEshonz tu the ð"terans 1)T
serten illùividiualz; hWEraz ei dll hir a veri deseided,
and jellerdli adopted, diferens betwin the vouelz in
Jernlan böcke and French jeune. 1\11'. Ellis, t
chilJ
on the SE1TI l;ifiludti, relnarks, "1\11'. Bell's pron
n-
siEshon, in meni illstansez, diferz from thát hwich ei
alTI akð"stolnd tu giv, espesbali in foren w
rdz. Ee-Ð
ov
s mE bi rOIJ." 1\11'. Sweet remarks, p. 10, "1\11'.
Ellis insists stroIJli on the monortoIJgal karakter ov
biz en eez and OOZe Ei hiI' hiz ee and 00 az distiIJkt
difÐoIJz, not enli in hiz IIJglish pron
nsiEshon, bð"t
(Dlse in hiz pron
nsiEshon ov French, Jerman, and
Latin." If fenetik reitiIJ ment this miniút fetografi
ov spoken soundz, in bwich l\les. Bell and Ellis eksél;
if eni aten1pt had ever bin n1Ed tu emploi this bEr-
splitiIJ lnashineri for a praktikal reform ov IIJglish
speliIJ, the çbjekshonz rEzd bei Archbishop Trench
wud bi kweit "ð"nanserabel. Ther ,vud bi fifti diferent
WEZ ov speliIJ IIJglish, and the konfiu3on wud bi
grEteI' than it iz nou. Not iven 1\11'. Bell'z -Ðerti-siks
kategoriz ov youel sound wud bi sð"fishent tu render
everi pekiuliariti ov youel kwoliti, pich and kwon-
titi, with perfekt akiurasi. (Si II. Sweet, "Histori
ov IIJglisb Soundz," pp. 58, 68.) Bð"t this woz
never intended, and bweil konsidiIJ æ"5ch tu the
Archbishop's argiuments, ei m
st not konsid tq
m
ch.
I-Iwot ei leik in 1\11'. Pitman'z sistem ov speliIJ iz
ekzaktli hwot ci nó haz bin founù fruIt witll bei

174

ON SPELLING.

therz nE111li that hi d
z not atelupt tu refein tlL nl
ch,
allù.tu ek8pre:3 in reitÏ1J thez enùIes ShEÙZ ov pron
nsi-
rshon, hwich 1118 bi ov the grEtest interest tu the stin-
dent ovakoustiks, or ov fSlletiks, az apleiù tu the st
di
ov liviIJ ùeialekts, b
t hwich, for praktil
al az well az
for seientifik filolojikal p
rp0sez, m
st bi enteirli ig-
nerd. ReitilJ woz never intended tu fstograf spoken
laIJgwejez : it woz Inent tu indiket, not tu pEnt
soundz. If Voltaire sez, "L'écriture c'est la pein-
ture de la voix," hi iz reit; b
t hwen hi gsz on tu
SE, "plus elle est ressen1blante, Ineilleur elle est," ei
am not selten that, az in a piktiur ov a landskEp, se
in a piktiur ov the vois, pri- Raftleit Ininiútnes me
not destroi the veri objekt ov the piktiur. LaIJgwej
dilz in brrod k
lorz, and reitiIJ rot tu folo the ekzam-
pel ov laIJgwej, hwich tho it alouz an enùIes vareiti
ov pron
nsiE8hon, restrikts itself for its en p
l'pOS,
for the p
rpos ov ekspresiIJ trot in rol its lllOdifikE-
shonz, tu a veri IÎ1nited n
mber ov tipikal voueiz and
konsonants. Out ov the Iarj n
mber ov soundz, for
instans, hwich hay bin kataIogd from the veri"ð"s
IIJglish deialekts, thoz onli kan bi rekogneizd az
konstitiuent elements ov the laIJgwej h,vich in, and
bei, thEr diferens from ich
ther, konVE a difel'ens ov
miniIJ. Ov s
ch pregnant and iJrot-konveiIJ voueIz,
IIJglish pozésez no nlor than twelve II wotever the
meinor shedz ov youel soundz in IIJglish deiaIekts nle
bi, thE dq not enrich the IaIJgwej, az s
ch, thát iz,
the dll not enehel the spiker tu konve mor miniút

ON SPELLING.

175

shEdz ov trot than the twelv tipikal siIJgel vouelz.
ßeseidz, ther jenerali iz hwot the French meit krol
a fenetik so1iùariti in ich deialekt. If W
n youel
chEnjez, the
therz ar apt tu folo, and the mEn ob-
jekt ov laIJgwej remEnz the 8Em iJrqout, nEmli, tu
prevent W
n w
rd frotll r
niIJ intu an
ther, and yet
tu abstEn from tlt miniút fonetik disti1Jkshonz, hwich
an ordinari ir meit feind it dirik
lt tu grasp. This
prinsipel ov fenetik solidariti iz ov grEt importans,
not onli i.n eksplEniIJ the gradiual chEnjez ov vouelz,
b
t (1)Ise s"5ch jeneral chEnjez ov konsonants az wi
si, for instans, in the Jerman Lautversclliebung.
Az Slin az W'5n pIEs iz left vEkant, ther iz preshur
tu fil it, or se m'5ch ov it az iz left vEkant, b
t nG
Iller.
Ther ar, in fakt, t1Í branchez, or at rol events, tlí
kweit distiIJkt praktikal aplikEshonz ov the seiens ov
Fenetiks, hwich for wont ov betel' nEmz, ei designEt
az filolojikal and deialektikal. Ther iz hwot Ir8
bi krold a filolojikal st"5di ov Fenetiks, hwich iz an
esenshal part ov the Seiens ov LaIJgwej, and haz for
its objekt tu giv a ldir eidia ov the alfabet, not az
riten, b
t az speken. It trits ov the matirialz out
ov hwich, the instruments with hwich, and the proses
bei hwich, vouelz and konsonants ar formd; and
after eksplEniIJ hou serten leterz agri, and difer, in
thEr matirial, in the instruments with hwich, and the
proses bei hwich thE ar prodiúst, it enEbelz
s tu

uderstand the krozez and rez'51ts ov hwot iz k())ld

176

ON SPELLIXG.

Fenetik Chenj. In meni respekts the most instr
ktiv
tritment ov the jel1eral tiori ov Fenetiks iz tu bi
foand in the Prâtisâkhyas; partikiularli in the elù-
est (400 B. K.), thát atacht tu the Rig Veda. =It: The
the nð"mber ov posibel soundz TIle sim infinit the
Ilð"mber ov rì
l soundz yqzd in Sanskrit or eni ð"ther
given laIJgwej for the pð"rpos ov ekspresig diferent
shedz. Oy miniIJ, iz veri IÎ1nited. It iz with thiz
brrod kategoriz ov sound alen that the Prâtisâl hyas
di l ; and it iz for a proper
nderstalldÏ1J ov thiz the
Seiens ov LalJgwej haz tu inklttd within its sfir a
kerful st
di ov Fenetiks.
The deialektikal st
di ov Fenetiks haz larjer ob-
jekts. It wishez tu ekzrost rol posibel soundz b wich
kan bi prodiúst bei the vo kal organz, litel konscrnd
az tu hwether thiz soundz ok-&r in eni ria1la1Jgwej or
not. It iz partikiularli y<.tsful for the p
rpos ov
pentiIJ, with the
tmost akiurasi, the aktiual pro-
l1ð"nsieshon ov individiualz, and ov fiksiIJ the fentest
shedz ov deialektik vareieti. The lllest marvelð"s
achivment in this branch ov apleid fenetiks me bi
sin in 1\11'. Bell'z "Vizibel Spieh."
Thiz tti branchez ov fenetik seiens, houever, shud
bi kept kerfuli distiIJ kt. Az the foundeshon ov a
praktikal alfabet, leikweiz az the onli sEf founùeshon
for the Seiens ov LalJgwej, wi wont filolojikal or
-Ðioretik Fonetiks. Wi wont an ð"nderstandiIJ ov

.::-:" Rig-Veùa-Prfltisâkhya, Das ä1teste Lehrbuch ùer Y('c1i
('hen
Phonetik, Sanskrit Text, mit frber
etzung und Anmerkungcn,
herausgegeLen," yon F. :Max
Iüller, Leipzig, ISO!).

ON SPELLING.

177

thez jeneral prinsipelz anù thez brrod kategoriz ov
seunù hwich ar trited in the Prâtisâkhyas; wi ùq
not wont elli ov the n1ÌniÚt deialektikal distiIJkshonz
hwich bay n8 gramatikal pð"rpos and ar therfor out-
seid the pel ov granlatik
l seiens. Tq miniút dis-
tiIJkshon prodiqsez konfiu30l1, and hwer it kan bi
avoided, without a sakrifeiz ovakiurasi, it rot tu bi
avoided. II WEr vEgnes ekzists in rialiti, and. hwer
llEtiur alouz a brmd n1aljin on either seid, it wud bi
rOIJ tu igner th
t latitiud. Akiurasi itself wud hir
bek
m inakiurasi.
B'St hwen wi wont tu ekzmst ml posibel ShEÙZ ov
sound, h wen wi wont tu fotograf the pckiuliaritiz ov
serten deialekts, or me3ur the ùivieshollz in the pro-
llð"nsieshon ov inùividiualz bei the mest nlÎniút t:e-
griz, wi then m
st aVEl ourselvz ov thát ekskwizit
artistik mashilleri konstrð"kted bei 1\11'. Bell, and
handeld with se m
ch skil bei 1\11'. A. J. Ellis, the
fiu onli wil bi ebel tu YQz it with rial s
kses.
Sð"m pipel sim tu Î1najin that tJ.e pouer ov dis-
ti1Jgwishig n1ÏniÚt diferensez ov soundz iz a natiural
gift, and kanot bi akweird. It mE bi so in kweit
ekscpshonal kEsez, b
t ei no az a fakt that a cheild
that had, az PiPel SE, ne ir for miuzik, and kud not
siIJ "God SEV the I( win," gradiuali akweird the
pouer ov distiggwishiIJ the ordinari Dots, and ov
siIJiIJ a tiun. SpikiIJ from n1ei on eksPlricns ei
shud SE that a gud ir k
mz bei inheritans, for,
az 10IJ az ei kan remember, a fols not, or, az wi yqst
VOL. v. 12

178

ON SPELLING.

tu kIDl it, an impiur (
t7n
ein) net, woz tu mi fizi-
kali pEnful. .
ß
t this apleiz tu miuzik enli, and it iz bei ne
Ininz jenerali tnt, that pipel htt hav a gud miuzikal
ir, hay mlso a gud ir for laIJgwej. Ei hav non
pipel kweit
nmiuzikal, pozést ov a veri gud ir for
laIJgwej, and vice versá. The t1Í natiural gifts, thEr-
for, if natiural gifts thE ar, ov distiIJgwishiIJ rriniÚt
degriz ov pich and kwoliti ov sound dlt
ot sim tu
bi the SEnl. The rial difik
lti, houever, hwich mEks
itself felt in disk-&siIJ miniút shËùz ov sound, areizez
froin the insð"fishensi ov our nomenklatiur, from the
ælmest icrezistibel influens ov ÏInaj inEshon, and in
the end, froin the wont ov a fonon1eter. A gud
n1Îuzis4an kan distiIJgwish betwin G sllarp anù ])
.flat, a gud fonetishan betwin a " lo-bak-nar e" and a
"le-mikst-nare" youel. Bð"t thE kanot rolWEz translEt
thEr sentiments intu definit laIJgwej, arId if thE trei
bei aktiual eksperiment tu imitEt thiz t-q soundz or
vouelz, the imperfekshonz ov the ir and tð"IJ, bet in
the spiker and the lisener, frikwentli render rol
atempts at a miutiual ð"nderstandiIJ imposibel. Wi
shal never areiv at seientifik presi30n til wi hav a
fonorueter for kwoliti ov sound, nor dq ei si hwei
sð"ch an instrument shud bi in1rosibel. Ei wel IP- .
nleinber 'Vheatstone teli1J mi, that hi wud
ndertEk
tu riprodiÚs bei minz ov an instrument everi shEd
ov youel in eni 1:ì1JgwEj ov the wð"rld, and ei shud
-ÐiIJk that Willis'z anù IIelmholtz'z eksperimcnts wud

ON SPELLING.

179

s
plei the elements from hwich s
ch a fenometer
ll1eit bi konstitiuted. Az sQn a.z wi kan me3ur,
defein, and riprodiús, at ple3 ur , hwot at prezcnt wi
kan snli deskr
ib in apro 1. simEt termz, the seiens
ov fonetiks wil bek
m mest frQtfuI, and asiúm its
lejitimet pIES az a sine qua non tu the stiudent ov
laIJgwej.
Ei hay sð"mteimz bin blEmd for haviIJ insisted on
Fsnetiks biiIJ rekogneizd az the foundEshon ov the
Seiens ov LaIJgwej. Prof. Benfey and ð"ther skolarz
protested agenst the chapter ei hay devoted tu Fe-
netiks in the Sekolld Siriz ov mei "Lektiurz," az
an ð"nnesesari inovEshon, and thoz protests hay be-
kð"m stil stroIJger ov let. Bð"t hir, tQ, wi mð"st dis-
tiIJgwish betwin tli tiIJz. Filolojikal or jeneral Fe-
netiks, ar, ei held, az stroIJli az ever, an integral
part ov the Seiens ov LaIJgwej; deialektik Fonetiks
me bi yl1,sful hir and ther, bð"t the shud bi kept
within ther proper sfir; ð"tberweiz, ei admit az redili
az eniWð"n els, the obskiúr rather than revil the brrod
and masiv kð"lorz ov sound h wich laIJgwej ytlzez for
its ordinari wð"rk.
If wi reflekt a litel, wi shal si that the filolojikal
konsepshon ov a youel iz s
nr
iIJ tetali diferent from
its piurli akoustik or deialektik konsepshon. The
fonner iz chifli konsernd with the sfir ov posibel
verieshon, and the later with the piurli fenoll1enal in-
dividiualiti ov ich youel. Tu the filol OJ ist, the {ri
vouelz in septÍJnus, for installs, hwotever ther ekzakt

180

ON SPELLING.

pron"BnsIeshonz nle hay bin at diferent teimz, and in
diferent provinsez ov tho l{ollw,n Elupeir, ar peten-
shali W
n anù the sell1. 'Vi luk on septiJnlls and
lj3òop.o; az on Sanskrit sapta1J
as, anù enli bei nOil)
that e, i, and It in selJtÙnlls ar rol reprezentativz ov
a short a, or that ojJti1nlts standz for the nler en-"
shent OlJfltJJHts and opt01J'lOS, dll wi tek in at Wð"n
glans the hel histori and p08ibel verieshon ov thiz
vouelz in diferent lalJgwejez and deialekts.
ven
hwer a youel disapirz kOlnplitli, az in gigno for
.qigeno, in 7rhr7:ltJ for 7rlïrê7:úJ, the meltal ei ov tho
filolojist disérnz and wez hwot no ir l{an hir. 11 nd
hweil in thiz kescz the etill1010jist, disregardiIJ the
klirest vareieti ov pronð"llsieshon, trits s
ch vouclz
az a, e, i, 0,
t az W
ll and the 8em, in
therz hwe1'
tíi vouelz sim tu hay ekzaktli the 8em sound tu the
deialektishan, the filolojist on hiz part persivz dif-
erensez ov the gretest Ï1nportans. The i in fides and
cliens me hay the sem sound az the i in gigno or
septinuts, the U ov luo me not direr from the '/l in
01Jtltl1
U8 or [ztÒen8, b
t ther intrinsik valiu, ther kep-
abilitiz ov greÐ and dekÉ, ar totali ùifcrent in ich.
'Vi shal never bi ebel tu spik with eni{ÏIJ leik rial
seielltifik akiurasi ov the pron
nsieshon ov Enshent
laIJgwejez, b
t iven if wi luk tu thEr riten api rans
anli, wi si agén and agén hou vouelz, riten aleik, ar
historikali totali distiIJkt. Grimm introdiÚst the dis-
tiIJ kshon betwin di and aí, betwin du and aÚ, not
bekroz it iz bei eni lninz serten that the prol1
nsie-

ON SPELLING.

181

shon ov thiz dif
olJz vErid, bð"t bekroz hi wisht tu
indikEt that th ante
idents ov di and dzt wel' diI-
erent fron1 thoz ov aí and aú. In Go-Ðik failtu,
(Sk. pasu, pecu), at iz a shortend tu i, and broken
befel" h tu di,. in GoÐik vâit (Sk. veda,olBa), ai, iz
radikal i streIJ
end tu di. In Go
ik daÚlttar (Sk.
duhitar {}uráT"f)f), aú iz radikal
,t breken tu aÛ,. in
aÚltna ð"ven (Sk. asna, brvó==lxvo==ò.xJ,/o), the a'lt iz
a, darkend tu 1t, and broken tu dll" Inveil in Gotik
bdltg (í'Cicpeur a ), dlt iz orijinal 1t strelJ-eend tu duo
If wen wi hiI' ê and ó in GoÐik wi si â, jð"st az wi si
Dorik ã beheind Eionik "I). Ifwen wi hil' c in canis,
wi si Sanskrit s,. hwen wi hi l' c in crllor, wi si
Sanskrit k. Ifwen wi hiI' r in rivo
, wi si Brian 9 ;
hwen wi hi l' r in cpÀir lù , wi si flrian z.
Thiz fiu ilð"strEshonz wiI eksplEn, ei hep the esen-
shal diferens in the aplikEshon ov fenetiks tu filoloji
and deialektoloji, and wiI she that in the former
our brðsh lllð"st ov nesesiti be brrod, hweil in the
later it ffi"5st bi fein. It iz bei miksiIJ "5P tlÍ separEt
Ieinz ov reserch, ich heili import:lnt in itself, that se
mð"ch konfiu3on haz ov lEt bin okE30nd. The valiu
ov piurli fÐnetik obzervEshonz shud on no al
oullt bi
ð"nderreted; b"5t it iz nesesari, for thát veri rizon,
that deial
ktikal az wel az filolojikal fonetiks shud
bi kOllfeind tu ther proper sfir. The filolojist haz
Inð"ch tu Iern from the fonetishan, b"5t hi shnd
never forget that hiI', az elshwEr, hwot iz brrod and

182

ON SPELLING.

tipikal iz az important anù az seientifikali akiuret az
hwot iz ll1iniÚt and speshal.
I-Iwot iz brrod and tipikal iz often ll1er akiuret
iven than hwot iz n1ÏniÚt and speshal. It meit bi
posibel. for instans, bei a fetografik proses, tu repre-
zent the ekzakt pozishon ov the tð"IJ and the inseid
wrolz ov the 1110UiJ hweil wi pronoúns the Italian youel
i. Bð"t it wud bi the grEtest mistBk tu s
poz that this
imej givz ð"S the anli WE in hwich thát youel iz, and
kan bi, pronoúnst. The ich individiual ll1E hay hiz
en WE ov plEsiIJ the tð"IJ in pronoÚnsiIJ i, wi hay ønli
tu trei the ekbperiment in order tu konvins ourselvz
that, with s
m efort, wi lTIE vEri that pozisholl ill
meni WEZ and yet prodiús the sound ov. i. I-I wen,
thErfor, in mei '
Lektiurz on the Sciens ov LaIJgwej,"
ei gEV piktiurz ov the pozishonz ov the vokal organz
rekweird for pronounsiIj the tipjkal leterz ov the
alfabet, ei tuk grEt kEr tu mEk thelTI tipikal, thát iz,
tu liv them rð"f skechez rather thall ll1iniÚt fetogl'afs.
Ei kanot beter ekspres awot ei fil on this point than
bci kwetiIJ the wð"rdz ov I-Iæckel:-
"For didaktik pð"rposez, simpel skimatik figiurz
ar far mor YlLsful than piktiurz prezerviIj the grrt-
est fEtfulnes tu llEtiur and karid out with the grEtest
akiurasi." (" Ziele und "\tVege," p. 37.)
[The follo,ving three letters, now introduced, ,vill
complete the Phonctic Alphabet-
d G, J,
for the sounds heard in-tlwn, cheap, she.]

ON SPELLING.

183

Tu ret"8"rn, after dis digreJon, tu l\Ir. Pitman'z
alfabet, ei repit dat it rekon1endz itself tu lTIei
meind bei hwot "5d:erz kcol its inakiurasi. It fez
its rial and praktikal wizdom bei not atemptiIj tu
fiks eni distiIJkJonz hwi9. ar not absolqtli nesesari.
If, for instans, wi tEk de gð"tð"ral teniuis, wi feind
that IIJgliJ rekogneizez W
n k enli, roldo its pro-
nð"nsiElon vEriz konsiderabli. It iz s"5luteimz pro-
noÚnst se az tu prodiús rolmost a Jarp krak; Sð"m-
teirnz it haz a dip, ho:e sound; and sð"mteimz a soft,
IEZi, 1noztillé karakter. It VEliz konsiderabli akord-
iIJ tu de vouelz hwi<j fole it, az enibodi mE hir, ne
fii, if hi pronoúnsez in sskselon, leot, lellt, le;lr, leal,
kit. B
t az IIJgliJ dð"Z not YlLz diz diferent kz for
the pð"rpos ov distÏ1JgwiJilJ w"8"rdz or gramatikal formz,
Wð"n brroù kategori ol1li ov voisles
tð"ral <jeks haz tu
bi admited in reitiIj IIJgliJ. In de Semitik la1Jgwejez
de kES iz dÏferel1t; not enli ar ka f and koj. diferent
in sound, bð"t dis dif
rens iz YlLzJ tu distiIJgwiJ dif-
erent miniIJz.
Or if wi tEk de vouel a in its oriJinal, piur pro-
n"5nSiEJon, leik Italian a, wi kan izi1i persiv dat it
haz diferent kð"lorz in diferent kountiz ov IIJgland.
Yet in reitÎJ] it IDE bi trited az Wð"n, bekroz it haz
b
t Wð"n and de SEm gramatikal intenJon, and d
z
not konv8 a niu mini1J til it eksiùz its weidest linlÎts.
Gud spikerz in IIJgland pronoÚns de a in last leik
de piur Italian a,. wid ð"derz it bekð"ffiZ brrod, wid:

derz -Ðin. Est de it mE dð"s OSilEt konsiderabli, it

184

ON SPELLI:KG.

In
st not el1kreg on de provins ov e, hwig wud (jenj
its millllJ tu lest,. nor on de provins ov 0, hwig wud
genj it tu lost,. nor on de provills ov It, hwig wud
enj
it tu lltst.
ae difikð"lti, del"for, hwi<j ArgbiJop Trench haz
pointed out iz l"iali restl'ikteù tu dez kesez hwer de
pronð"nsieJon ov vouelz-fol' it iz wid vouelz <jifli
dat wi ar trð"beld-veriz se Inð"g az tu overstep de
broxlest linÜts ov Wð"n ov de rekogneizd kategoriz
ov sounù, and tu enkreg on an
der. If wi tek de
wð"rd fast, hwig iz pronoÚnst veri di.ferentli ivell bei
ediukEted pipel, del' wud bi no nesesiti for indiketiIJ
in reiti:rJ de direrent Jeùz ov prOnð"nSiEJon hwig lei
betwi n de sound ov de J ort Italian a and de 10lJ a
herd in father. Bð"t hwen de a in fast iz pronoÚnst
leik de a in fat, den de nesesiti ov a niu grafIk
ekspellent wud areiz, and ArgbiJop Trench wud hi
reit in twitÏ1J fenetik reformerz wid salJkJonilJ tlí
spelÎlJz for de sem w'8"rd.
Ei kud menJon de nEmz ov -Ðri biJops, Wð"n ov
hllnl pronoúnst de youel in God leik Gmd, anð"der
leik rod, a fJerd leik gad. (Ie last pronð"nsirJon wud
probabli bi kondemd bei everibodi, Lð"t de
der t1Í
wud reInEn saIJkJond bei de heiest rotoriti, and der-
for retEnd in fonetik reitiIJ.
Se far, den, ei admit dat ArgbiJop Trench haz
pointed out a rial difikð"lti inhirent in fonetik reitÏIJ ;
b
t hwot iz dát WSll difik
lti kOInpErd wid de difi-

ON SPELLING.

185

k
ltiz ov de prezent sistem ov IIJgliJ speliIJ? It
wud not bi onest tu trei tu eYEd biz ç;alj, bei sEig
dat der iz bð"t Wð"n prOn"5nSiEJon rekogneizd bei
de yqzeJ ov eùiukEted plpe!. éIát iz not se, and
dez hIt ne best de beiolQji ov laIJgwej, no dat it
kanût bi see He veri Ie if ov laIJgwej konsists in a
konstant frikJon betwin de sentl'ipet'll fors ov IG
s-
tom and de sentrifiugal fors ov indiviùiual fridom.
Agenst dát difik"5lti dErfor, del' iz ne renledi. Onli
bi l' agen de Al'gbiJop simz tu hay overlukt de fakt
dat de diIikð"lti beloIJz tu de prezent sistem ov spel-
iIJ uirli az m"&<] az tu de fonetik sistem. ITer iz hzst
Wð"n l'ekogneizù 'VE ov spe1iIJ, b
t everibodi pro-
noúnsez akol'diIJ tu hiz en idiosinkrasiz. It wud bi
de SEll1 wid fenetik speliIJ. Wð"n pl'Onð"nSiEJon, de
best l'ekogneizd, wud bay tu bi adopted az a standard
in fonetik reitiIJ, liviIJ tu everi Ing,liftnan biz fridom
tu pronoúns az sin1eÐ gud tu him. 'Vi Jud lqz n
-
-ÐilJ ov h wot wi nou pozés, and rol de aùvantejez ov
fenetik reitilJ wud renu:n "5nÏ1npErd. <Ie rial stEt ov
de kES iz, dErfor, dis-New
n defendz de prezent
sistcm ov spelilJ; everiwð"n aÙlnits de siri-s-s injuri
hwig it inflikts on naJonal ediukEJon. Everibodi
admits de praktikal advantejcz ov fenetik spe!i)J,
b
t after d
it, rol eksklE111 dat a reforn1 ov
peliIJ,
hweder parlal or komp1it, iz Î1nposibel. II wedel' it
iz imposibel or not, ei ghulli liv tu nlcn ov de w
rld
tu deseid. Az a skolar, az a stiudent ov de histori
ov lalJgwej, ei simpli n1Entrn dat in everi riten laIJg-

18G

ON SPEI..LING.

wej a reform ov speliIJ iz, sItner or IEter, inevitabel.
No dout de ivil dE 1118 hi put of. Ei hay litel dout
dat it wil bi put of for meni jenerEJonz, and dat a
rial reform wi1 probabli not bi karid. eksept kon-
kð"rentii wid a veiolent soJal konv
IJon. Onli let de
kwestion bi argiud fErli. Let fakts hay S
ln WEt,
and let it not hi sð"pozd bei TIlen ov de w
rld dat
doz hIt def
nd de prinsipelz ov de Fonetik Niuz ar
ellli titotalerz and vejet8rianz, blì hav never lernd bOll
tu spel.
If ei hav spoken strolJli in sð"port ov 1\11'. Pit-
man'z sistem, it iz not bekroz on rol points ei kon-
sider it siupirior tu de f)istelllz prepErd bei ð"der re-
fonnerz, hq ar dEli inkrisilJ in n
mber, b"St gifli
bekmz it haz bin tested so larjli, and haz stud de
test wel. l\Ir. Pitman'z Fenètik J8rnal haz nou
LI880] bin pð"bliJt -ßerti-8t yirz, and if it iz non ð:at
it iz pð"bliJt ,vìk1i in 12,000 kopiz, ig kopi repro.
zentÎIJ at list for or feiv qderz, it mE not sin1 so veri
fqliJ, after rol, if wi Ìlnajin dat der iz Sð"ill veital
pouer in dát insignifikant jern1.

ON SANSKRIT '
rEXTS DISOOV-
I
ERED IN J .L
p AN.

J..EAD AT THE l\IEETING OF THE nOYAL ASIATIC
SOCIETY, FEllRUARY 16, 1880.

IT is probably in the recollection of sonle of the
senior nleInbers of this Society how wide and deep
an interest ,vas excited in the year 1853 by the pub-
lication of Stanis]as Julien's translation of the" Life
and Travels of Hiou
n-thsang." The account given
by an eye-\vitness of the religious, social, political,
and literary state of India at the beginning of the
seventh century of our era was like a rocket, carrying
a rope to a ,vhole cre\V of struggling scholars, on the
point of being dro\vned in the sea of Indian chro-
nology; and the rope was eagerly gra.sped by all,
\vbether their special object was the history of Indian
religion, or the history of Indian literature, archi-
tecture, or politics. "\Vhile nlany books on Indian
literature, puLlished fi ve-and-twenty years ago, are
no\V put aside and forgotten, Julien's three vohunes
of Hioueu-thsang still Inaintain a fresh interest, and
supply ne'v subjpcts for discussion, as 111ay be seen
even in the last nUlllber of the Journal of your So..
ciety.
I had the honor and pleasure of working \vith
Stanislas J uliell, \vhen he was compiling those large
lists of Sanskrit anù Chinese words \vhich fOrll1ed

188 ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN.

the foundation of his translation of IIiouen-thsang,
and enabled him in his classical wOl'k the" :\léthode
pour déchiffrer et transcri ee les noms Sanskrits"
(1861), to solve a riddle which had puzzled Oriental
scholars for a long titue - viz., ho\v it happened that
the original Sanskrit nalnes had been so completely
disguised and rendered aln10st unrecognizable in the
Chinese translations of Sanskrit texts, and how they
could be restored to their original forin.
I had likewise the honor and pleasure of \vorking
with your late President, Professor II. II. 'Vilson,
\vhen, after reading Julien's works, he conceived
the idea that SOU1e of the original Sanskrit texts of
\vhich the Chinese translations had been recovered
nlight still be founù in the Inonasteries of China.
His influential position as Presiùent of your Society,
and his personal relations with Sir John Bowring,
then English Resident in China, enabled hitll to set
in nlotion a powerful Inachillery for attaining his
object; and if you look back SOllle five-and-bventy
years, you \vill find in your J ourual a full account of
the correspondence that passed bet\veen Professor
"'.Tilson, Sir .J. Bo\vring, and Dr. Edkins, on the
search after Sanskrit 1\[8S. in the teinples or Inonas-
teries of China.
On :February 15, 1854, Professor 'Vilson '\vrites
froln Oxforù to Sir John Bo\vring:-
" I send you here\vith a list of the Sanskrit works
carried to China by H \ven rrsang in the nliddle of
the seventh century, and in great part translated by
hinl, or under his supervi::;ion, into Chinese. If any
of theIn, especially tlte or(r;iJlals, should be still in
existence, you would ùo good service to San::;krit
literature and to the history of BuùùLisll1 by pro-
curing copies."

ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN. 189

Ohinese Translators of Sanskrit Texts.
It is a well-known fact that, even long before the
tilne of Hionen-thsang - that is, long before the
seventh century of our era - large nU111bers of San-
skrit MSS. had been exported to China. These lit-
erary exportations began as early as the first century
A. D. "\Vhen we read for the first tinle of commis-
sioners being sent to India by 1\1ing-ti, the Enlperor
of China, the second sovereign of the Eastern Han
dynasty, about 62 or 65 À. D., we are told that they
returned to China witil a white horse, carrying books
and images.! And the account proceeds to state that
"these books still reolain, and are reverenced and
,vorshipped."
Frorl1 that time, when Buddhis111 was first officially
recognized in China,2 there is an almost unbroken
succession of inlporters and translators of Buddhist,
in some cases of Brabnlanic texts also, till we COBle
to tbe two fanlous .expeditions, the one undertaken
by Fa-hian in 400-415, the other by IIiouen-thsang,
. 629-645 A. D. Fa-hian's Travels were translated into
French by Abel Rémusat (1836), into Englisb by
l\lr. Beal (1869). Hiouen-thsang's Travels are well
known through Stanislas Julien's admirable transla-
tion. Of Hiouen-thsang we are told that he brought
back from India no less than 520 fasciculi, or 657
spparate works, ,vhich had to be carried by twenty-
two horses.3 He translated, or had translated, 740
works, fortl1ing 1,335 fasciculi.
1 Beal, Travels of Buddhist Pil!p'ims, Introd. p. xxi.; Chinese Reposi-
tory, vol. x. No.3, 1\Iarch, 184:1.

See an account of the Introduction of Bu(ldhism into China, in Jour-
nal Asiatique, 185û, August, p. 105. Recherches sur l' origine des ordres
religieux dans l' empire chinois, par TIazin.
8 Stan. Julicll, Pèlerins Buuddhistes, vol. i. p. 296.

190 ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN.

I say nothing of earlier traces of Buddhism ,vhich
are supposed to occur in Chinese books. \Vhatever
they mayalnount to, we look in vain in them for evi-
dence of any Chinese translations of B l1ddhist books
before the tÏ1ne of the Emperor l\ling-ti; and ,vha.t
concerns us at present is, not the existence or the
spreading of B uddhisln towards the north and east
long before the beginning of the Christian era, but
the existence of Buddhist books, so far as it can be
proved at that tinle by the existence of Chinese
translations the date of which can be fixed with suf-
ficient certainty.
In the following rernarks on the history of these
translations I bave had the great advantage of being
able to use the Annals of the Sui Dynasty (589-618),
kindly translated for me by Professor Lpgge. In
China the history of each dynasty was written under
the succeeding dynasty fronl doculnents .which Inay
be supposed to be contemporaneous ,vith the events .
they relate. The account given in the Sui Chroni-
cles of the introduction of Buddhism and Buddhist
works into China is said to be the best general ac-
count to be found in early Chinese literature, and the
facts here stated may be looked upon .as far more
trustworthy than the notices hitherto relied upon, and
collected froln Chinese writers of different dates and
different localities. I have also had the assistance of
1\11'. Bunyiu Nanjio, ,vho compared the names of the
translators mentioned in the Sui Annals with the
nanles as given in the IC'ai-yuen-shih-kiao-u1u-lu (Cat-
alogue of the BuJJ.hist books cOlnpiled in the period
J{'ai-ynen [A. D. 713-741]); and though there still
remain SOHle doubtful points, we l11ay rest aSburecl
that the dates assigned to the principal Chinese trans..

ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN. 11>1

lators and their works can be depended on as his-
torically trustworthy.
With regard to the period anterior to l\ling-ti, the
Sui Chronicles tell us that after an investigation of
the records, it was kno\vn that Bnddhislll had not
been brought to China previously to the Han dynasty
(began 206 B. c.), though SOBle say that it bad long
been spread abroad, but had disappeared again in the
tÏ1ne of the Ií.láll 1 (221-206 B. c.). Afterwards, ho,v-
ever, 'v hen Kang-kltien ,vas sent on a mission to the
regions of the 'Vest (about 130 B. c.), he is sup-
posed to have becoll1e acquainted with the religion of
Budùha. . He ,vas 111ade prisoner by the Hiungnu
(Huns),2 and, being kept by tbeln for ten years, he
may ,veIl bave acquired during his captivity SOlue
knowledge of Buddhis111, which at a very early till1e
had spread frolll Cabu1 3 towards the north and the
east.
^
In the time of the Elllperor Ai (n. c. 6-2) we read
that Iíhin-king caused I-tsun to teach the Buddhist
Sûtras orally, but that the people gave no credence to
tbenl. All this seenlS to rest on semi-historical evi-
dence only.
The first official recognition of Buddhislll in China
dates from tbe reign of the Elnperor 1\1ing-ti, and the
following account, though not altogether free from a

1 Dr. Edkins in his Notices of Buddhism in China (which unfortunately
are not paged) says that Indians arriyed at the capital of China in Sl1ensi
in 217 B. c. to propagate their religion.
2 Dr. Edkins, l. c., states that Kang-khien, on his return from the coun-
try of the Getæ, informed the Emperor "r l1-ti that he had seen articles of
traffic from Shindo. The cOlnmentator adds that the Harne is pronounced
Kando and Tindo, and that it is the country of the barbarians called Bud-
dha (sic).
8 Kabul or Ko-fu is, in the Ea::;tern Han annals, called a state of the
Yüeh-ki.

192 ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN.

legendary coloring, is generally accepted as authentic
by Chinese scholars: "1'he Elnperor l\Iing-ti, of the
After IIan dynasty (58-75 A, D.), dreanlt that a
nlan of metal (or golden color) "ras flying and walk-
ing in a courtyard of the palace. ""Vhen he told his
dream in the COl-1rt, Fu-Î said that the figure was
that of Buddha. On this the EI11peror sent the gen-
tlenlan-usher rrs
i-yin and J(lân-leing (who nlust then
ha.ve been gro,ving old) both to the country of the
great Y ueh-lei 1 and to India, in order to seek for such
. "
an linage.
An earlier account of the saBle event is to be found
in the Annals of the After (or Eastern) IIan dynasty
(25-120 A. D.). These annals ,vere cOl1lpileù by
:Fan-yeh, who was afterwards condenlneù to death as
a rebel (445 A. D.). Here we read 2 (vol. 88, fol.
8 a seq.): "There is a tradition that the Elnperor
1\1ing-ti (58-75 A. D.) drealnt that there was a giant-
like nlan of golden color,3 whose head was refulgent.
The Enlperor \vanted his retainers to interpret it.
Then SOl1le said, 'There is a god ( or spirit) in the
West who is called :B'o, vihose height is sixteen feet,
and of golden color.' Having heard this, the Ell1peror
at once sent messengers to Tien-kl1 (i. e. India), to
inquire after the doctrine of Buddha. Subsequently,
copies of the inlage of Buddha ,vere dra\vn in the
ll1iddle country (i. e. China)."
The emissaries WhOlll the Elnperor Ming-ti had
sent to Iuùia obtained a Buddhist Sûtra in forty-two
sections, and an iInage of Buddha, with which and
the Shânlans I{â.
yapa. l\Iâtanga and ](û-fa-lan, they

1 Generally identified
ith the Getæ, but without sufficient proof.
2 Translatpd by Mr. Bunyiu Nanjio.
8 The golden color or s u varna varnatâ is one of the thirty-two marks
of a Buddha, recognized both in the Southern and Northern schools (Bur.
n
uf, Lotus, 5ïfl).

ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN. 193

returned to the East. "\Vben Tsâi-yin approached
(the capital), he caused the book to be borne on a
,vhite horse, and on this account the lnonastery of the
"\Vhite IIorse ,vas built on the west of the Y ung gate
of the city of Lo to lodge it. The classic \vas tied up
and placed in the stone house of the Lan tower, and,
lnoreover, pictures of the iluage ,vere drawn and kept
in the I(lting-yiian to\ver, and at the top of the
Hsien-kieh hill.
Here \ve seenl to be on terra firrna, for sonle of the
literary works by I(âsyapa l\Ifttaliga and I(û-fa-lan
are still in existence. I(âsyapa. l\lâtaÙga (or, it Inay
be, I{
sya l\lâtaÏ1ga 1) is clearly a Sanskrit nalne.
1\1âtaÏ1ga, though the nalne of a Itandâla or low-caste
lnan, n1Íght ,veIl be borne by a ßudJbist priest. 2
The naUle of Kû-fa-lan, ho\vever, is Inore difficult.
Chinese scholars declare that it can only be a Chinese
name,3 yet if I(û-fa-lan caille fron1 India with Kâ-
syapa, we should expect that he too bore a Sanskrit
name. In that case, I(û n1Ìght be taken as the last
character of Tieu-kû, India, \vhich character is pre-
fixed to the nanles of other Indian priests living in
China. His ll:une would be Fâ-Ian, i. e. Dhanna + x,
,vhatever 1 a 11 Inay signify, perhaps pad In a, lotus. 4

1 This name is written in various ways, Ka-Rhio-ma-tô-giya, Ka-shio-
ma-tû, Shio-ma-tû, Ka-tô, Ma-tô. In the Fan-i-ming-i-tsi (vol. iii. foJ. 4 a),
it is saill "that K. was a natin of Central India, and a llrâhman by caste.
Having ùeen indted ùy the Chinese envoy, T8âi-:vin, he came to China,
saw the Emperor, and died in Lo-yang, the capital." Of Kû-fa-Ian it is
said (l. c. vol. iii. foI. 4) that he was a native of Central India, well versed
in Vinaya. 'Vhen invited to go to China, the King would not let him de-
part. lie left secretly, and arrived in China after Kâ.-:yapa. They trans-
lated the SîÜra in forty-two sections together. After Kâsyapa died, Kû-
fa-Ian tran
lated five SCUms.
2 See Yasala-
ntta (in Nipâta-
utta), v. 22.
3 Fa is the TIuddhi::;t efJni,-alent for friar.
4 Mr. ll. K anjio inform:: me that both in China and .Japan nnùdhist
priests adopt eirhf'r KÎl, the last chamctC'r of Tien-l.:Ù, ltHlia, or Shih, the
first chan.cter of Shilhkia- i. e. Sâkya-as their t-liruame.
YUL. v. 13

19-:1 ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN.

M. Feer,I calls hiln Gobharana, ,vithout, however,
giving his authority for such a nan1e. The Sutra of
the forty-t\vO sections exists in Chinese, but neither
in Sanskrit nor in Pftli, and Inany difficulties ,vould
be ren10ved if we adnlitted, with IVI. Feel', tha.t this
so-called Sûtra of the forty-two sections was really
the work of JCâsyapa and I(û-fa-Ian, who considered
such an epitome of BudJhist doctrines, based chiefly
on original texts, useful for their ne\v converts in
China.
It is curious that the Sui Annals speak here of no
other literary work due to J{âsyapa and Kû-fa-Ian,
though they afterwards mention the Shih-lcu Sûtra
by Kû-fa-lan as a \vork ahnost unintelligible. In the
Fan-i-ming-i-tsi (vol. iii. fol. 4 b), mention is made
of five Sûtras, translated by Kû-fa-lan alone, after
IC
syapa's death. In the J('ai-yuen-shih-kiao-nlu-Iu
catalogue of the Dudùhist books, conlpiled in the
period JC'ai-yuen (713-741 A. D.), vol. i. fol. 6, four
Sûtras only are ascribed to I(û-fa-lan :-
1. The Dasabhûuli, called the Sûtra on the de-
struction of the causes of perplexity in the ten sta-
tions; 70 A. D. This is the Shi-kû Sûtra.
2. The Sûtra of the treasure of the sea of the law
(Dharn1a-san1udra-kosha ?).
3. The Sûtra of the original conduct of Buddha
(Fo-pen-hing-king); 68 A. D. (taken by Julien for a
translation of the Lalita-vistara).
4. The Sûtra of the original birth of Buddha
( G!\taka).
The cOlnpiler of the catalogue adds that these
translations have long been lost.

ì L. Feer, Sutr(t en 4-2 ll1'licles, p. xxvii. Le Dhammapcula par F. IIû,
,uivi dft Sidra (n 42 /ll'ticles, par Léon Feel', 1878, p. xxiv.

ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN. 195

The next patron of Buddhis1l1 was Ying, the ICing
of ](!tÛ, at the tilne of the Emperor Kang, his father
(76-88). l\lany Shftnutl1s, it is said, came to China
then from the \Vestern regions, bringing Buddhist
Sût
as. Sonle of these translations, ho\vever, proved
unintelligible.
During the reign of the Enlperor H\van (147-167),
An-shi-kao (usually called An-shing), a Shâman of
An-hsi,l brought classical books to Lo, and translated
theill. This is evidently the saIne translator of \VhOlll
1\11'. Beal (" J. R. A. S." 1856, pp. 327, 332) speaks
as a native of Eastern Persia or Parthia, and \vhose
nalne 1\11'. 1V ylie \vished to identify with Arsak. As
An-shi-kao is reported to have been a royal prince,
who l11ade himself a mendicant and travelled as far
as China, 1\11'. 'V ylie snpposes that he was the son of
one of the Arsacidæ, ICings of Persia. 1\11'. Beal on
the con trary, takes the nalne to be a corruption of
Asvaka or Assaka - i. e. 'I7r7rá<TLOL. 2
Under the EIIlperor Ling, 168-189 A. D., Ki-k!wn
(or Ki-tsin), a Shâman from the Yneh-ki (called
Ki-lau-kia-kllai by Real), Kû-fo-soh (Ta-fo-sa), an
Indian Sh
man, and others, worked together to pro-
duce a translation of the Nirv
na-sûtra, in two sec-
tions. The I{'ai-yuell-lu ascribes twenty-three works
to Ki-kltan, and two Sûtras to Kû-fo-soh.
Towards the end of the Han dynasty, Ku-yung,
the grand guardian, was a follower of Buddha.
In the time of the Three I{ingdolIls (220-264)

1 In neal's Catalogue this name is spelt An-shi-ko, An-shi-kao, and
Ngan-shai-ko.
2 His tram.lations occur in Beal's Catalogue, pp. 31, 35, 37, 38, 40 (Vis),
41 (bis), 42 (bis), 43, 45, 46, 47, 49, 50, 51 (ter.), 52 (bis), 54, 70, 88, û5
(bis). In the K'ai-yuen-Ill it is stated that he translated 9û works in 115
fascicles.

106 ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN .JAr AN.

I(hang-sal1g-hui" a Sbtìl1lan of the "\Vestern regions,
mtll1e to \V û 1 with Sûtras and translated theln.
Sun-lcltiian, the sovereign, believed in Buddbisln.
About tbe saIne tilne l{hang-sang-khai translated
the longer text of the Snkhavatîvyûha.
In 'Yei,2 during the period H ,vang-lehu (220-2
6)
the Chinese first observed the Buddhist precepts,
shaved their heads, and becanle Sang - i. e. nlonks.
Even before this, a Shâlnan of the \Vestern re-
gi.ons bad COll1e here and translated the I-Isitìo-pin
Sûtra - i. e. tbe Sûtra of Snlaller l\Iatters (K.lnulda-
kanikâya? ) - but the head and tail of it ,vere con-
tradictory, so that it could not be understood.
In the period l{an-lû (25G-259), J(û-shi-hsing
(Chu-shuh-lal1, in Beal's "Catalogue") ,vent to the
\Vest as far as K.hoten, and obtained a Sûtra in ninety
sections, with ,vhich he caBle back to Y éh, in the
Tsill period of Yüen-khang (291-299), and translated
it (with Dharillaraksha) under the title of "Light-
.. P ^ ^ .^ S ^ "3
eunttIng ra!/na-paralnlta utra.
In the period Thai-sbi (265-274), under the "\Vest-
ern Tsiu (265-316), I{û-fâ-hu 4 (Dharluaraksba), a
Sh
man of the Yüeh-lei, travelled tbrough the various
kingdol1ls of the \Vest, and brought a large colle-ction
of books hOUle to Lo, wbere he translated thenl. It
is stated in the Catalogue of the Great ](a,u, an inter-
1 Wû, comprising Keh-kiang and other parts, with its capital in what is
now Sû-kau, was the southern one of the Three Kingdoms. Sun-klLiian
was its first sovereign.
2 The northern of the Three Kingdoms, with its capital latterly in Lo-
yang.
3 See Beal, Catalogue, p. 5.
4 This name, Kû-fà-hu, is generally )'e-tran
lated as Dharmaraksha. Kû
is the second clmracter in Tien-kû, the name of Imlia, and this character
was used as their surname by many Indian priests while living in China.
In that case their Sansluit names were mostly translated into two Chinese
characters: as Fá (law=dharma), 1m (protection=rak:sha). - U. N.

ON SAXSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN. 197
lude in the (1)rnasty of Thang (690-705 A. D.), that
in the seventh year of the period Thai-khang (286)
he translated King-fa-lnva - i. e. the Saddharnla-pun-
darîka (Deal, " Catalogue," p. 14).1
About 300 A. D. Ki-kung-ming translated the
"\Vei-lna (Viluala-kîrttÌ) and Fa-h,va (Saddharlna-
pundarîka).2
In 335 the prince of the Khan kingdom (during
the Tsill dynasty) perlnitted his subjects to becolne
Sh
lnans, influenced chiefly by BuddhasÏ1nha.3
In the titne of the rebel Shih-leh, 330-333, during
the Tsin dynasty, a Shânl::ul 'Vei-tao-an, or Tao-an,
of Khang-shan, studied Buddhist literature under
Buddhasin
ha. He produced a 1110re correct transla-
tion of the Viu1ala-kîrtti-sûtra (and Saddharn1a-pun-
darî.ka), and taught it widely; but as he was not an
original translator, his nanle is not mentioned in the
J{'ai-yuen-ill. On account of political troubles, T
o-
an led his disciples south,vard, to Hsin-ye, and dis-
patched thelIl to different quarters - Fft-shang to
Yang-kfiu, Fâ-h\va to .Shû - \vhile he hitnself, \vith
'Vei-yiian, went to Hsiang-yang and Khang-an. Here
Fu-klâen, the sovereign of the Fûs, \vho about 350
had got possession of Khang-an, resisting the author-
ity of the Tsin, and establishing the dynasty of the
Forlner Klân, received hinl with distinction. It ,vas
at the wish of Tâo-an that Fn-khien invited !{u111â-
ragîva to I(hang-an; but ,vhen, after a long delay,
J{ulllâragîva arrived there, in the seconù year of the

1 According to Mr. Deal (Fahian, p. xxiii.), this Kû-f:1-hu, with the Help
of othel. Shâmam'l, translated no less than 1G5 texts, and among them the
Lalita-vistara (Pon-yao-king), the Nirv[tna Sûtra, and the SU\'arna-pra-
bh:1
il-Sûtra (2G3-308). The K'ai-yuen-Iu assigns to him 275 works, in 354
fascicles.
2 Edkins, l. c. Deal, Catalugue, p. 17; 14. 8 Edkins, t. c.

198 ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN .JAPAN.

period Hung-shi (400 A. D.), under Yâo-hsing, ,vho,
in 394, had succeeded Yâo-kltang,1 the founder of the
After I(hin dynasty, T
o-an had been dead already
t\venty years. His corrected translations, however,
were approved by l{llll1:1ragîva.
This J{lun:1ragîva In arks a ne\v period of great ac-
tivity in the translation of Buddhist texts. He is
said to have come fron1 I{u-tsi, in Tibet, \vhere the
En1peror Y
o-hsing (397-415) sent for hiln. Anlong
his translations are 111entioned the "\Vei-nla or Vin1a-
la-kîrtti-sûtra (Beal's " Catalogue," p. 17); the Sad-
dhanna-pundarîka (Deal's" Catalogue," p. 15); the
Satyasiddba-vyâkarana sâstra (Deal's "Catalogue,"
p. 80). lIe ,vas a contemporary of the great traveller,
Fa-bian, ,vho ,vent fronl ](ltang-an to India, travelled
through more than thirty states, and came back to
Nanking in 414, to find the Ell1perOr Yâo-hsing over-
turned by the Eastern Tsill dynasty. He \vas ac-
cOlllpanied by the Indian contell1plationist, Buddha-
bhadra. 2 Bllddhabhadra translated the Fa-yan-king,
the Buddhâvatamsaka-vaipulya-sûtra (Deal's "Cata-
logue," p. 9), and he and Fa-hian together, tbe 1\fo-ho-
sang-ki-liu - i. e. the Vinaya of the 1\Iabâsaügbika
school (Bea1, "Catalogue," p. 68).
Another Shâlnan ,vho travelled to India about the
sanle till1e ,vas Ki-nlang, of Hsin-fang, a district city

1 The Yâos subdued the Fûs, and ruled as the dynasty of the After Kliin.
2 See p. 208. He is sometimes called nala
an, or, according to Edkins,
Palat'sanga, Baddala, or Dabadara. In the :Fan-i-ming-i-tsi (vol. iii. foI.
G) the following account of Duddhabhadra is given: "llmillhabhadra met
}{umâragîva in China, and whenever the latter found any doubts, the" for-
mer was always asked for an explanation. In the fourteenth year of I-hsi
(418 A. D.) nuddhabhadra tmnslated the Fa-ran-king in sixty volumes."
Thii\ SiUra i the Ta-fang-kwang-fo-fa-yan-king, Buddhâvatamsaka-vai-
pulya-sûtra (Bears Catalo!Jue, p. 9). This translation was brought to
Japan in 73G.

ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN. 199

of Kâo-lchang. In 419, in the period Yüan-hsi, .he
went as far as Pâtali-putra, where he obtained the
Nirvana-sûtra, and the Sañghika, a book of disci-
line. l After his return to l{âo-lcltang be translated
the Nirvâna-sûtra in twenty sections.
Afterwards the Indian Shâlnan Dharmaraksba 11. 2
brought other copies of the foreign J\tlSS. to the West
of the Ho. And Tsü-kl
ü l\fung-sllu, the king of North
Liang, sent messengers to Kâo-khang for the copy
\vhich Ki-ulang bad brought, wishing to compare the
two. 3
\Vhen Ki-mang's copy arrived,4 a translation Vias
nlade of it in thirty sections. Dharmaraksba II.
translated the Suvarna-prabhâsa and the Nirvâna-
sûtra, 416-423 A. D. The l{'ai-yuen-lu ascribes nine-
teen ",yorks to D harmalatsin in 131 fascicles.
Buddhisln from that tilue spread very rapidly in
China, and the translations became too nUlnerous to
be all 11lentioned.
The fifahftyâna school was represented at that tin1e
chiefly by the follo\ving translations: -
1 The Sang-ki-liu, rules of priesthood; i. e. the Vinaya of the :Mahâ-
sañghika school.
2 I call him Dbarmaraksha II., in order to pre,"ent a confusion which has
been produced by identifying two Shâmans who lived at a distance of nearly
200 years - the one 250 A. D., the other 420 A. D. The first is called Kû-
fâ-hu, which can be rendered Dharmaraksha; the second is called Fâ-ffLng
(law-prosperity), but, if transliterated, he is best known by the names T'on-
mo-Ia-tsin, T'an-mo-tsin, or Dhanllalatsin. He was a native of Central
India, and arrived in China in the first year of the period Hiouen-shi of
the TsÜ-khÜ family of the Northem Liang, 414: A. D. He was the contem-
poraryof Ki-mang, whom Mr. Beal place3 about 250 A. D., in order to
make him a contemporary of Dharmaraksha I.
S Mung-sun died 432, and was succeeded by his heir, who lost his king-
dom in 4:39. Yâo-khang's kingdom, however, was destroyed by the East-
ern T:;in, at the tiple of his second successor, 417, not by Mung-sun.
4 It is said in the tenth year of the period IIullg-shi of Yfw-kllang (better
hsing), the copy arrived at Klzang-an. llut this cannot be, if Ki-mang
went to India in 419. There must be something wrong in these dates.

200 ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN.

The Vimalakîrtti-sûtra (Beal, "Cata- ì
logue," p. 17.) I
The Saùdbarmapundarîka-sûtra (Deal,
Translated by Ku-
" Catalogue," p. 15) J lllâragîva.
The Satyasidùhavyâkarana-sâstra (Beal,
" Catalogue," p. 80)
The SuvarnapraLhâsa-sûtra (BeaI, " Cat- } T I t d b DI
rans a e y lar-
aloO'ue," P . 15 ) 1 . Dh
r . ð. ma atsm, or ar-
] he N lrvâna-sûtra (Beal, " Catalogue," .1_ I II
p. 12) J mantAS la .
The Htnayâna school ,vas represented by-
The Sarvåstivâùa-vinaya by Kumâragîva (neal, " Catalogue,"
pp. 67, 68).
The Dîrghågarna-sûtra, by Duùùhayasas, 410 A. D. (Beal,
" Catalogue," p. 36).
The Yinaya of the four Parts, by Buùdhayasas.1
The Ekottarâgama-sûtra (Anguttara), translated by Dhar-
manandin, of Tukhâra (Fa-lH-i).
The Abhiùharma ùh-quisitions, by Dharmaya.ms,2 of Ko-
phene.
During the period of I.Jung-an (397-401) the Ekot-
tar!ìgalna. (Anguttara) anù 1\Iadhyalnâganla-sûtras 3
were translated by SaIighadeva of I\:ophene. 1"'his is
probably the l\Iaggltinla NiktLya, translated by Gota-
ll1a Sailghadeva, under the Eastern Tsin dynasty,
317 -419.
In the period Î -hsi (405-418) the Shtünan I(i-fâ-
ling brought from IChoten to Nanking, the southern
capital, the H ,vâ-yen Sûtra in 36,000 gâthâs, and
translated it. This ll1ay be the .uuddhâvab.tnlsaka-
sûtra, caned the Ta-fang-lnvang-fo-fa-yall-king (Deal's
H Catalogue," pp. Û., 10). l'his transla.tor is not Inen-
tioned in the I\.'ai-yuen-lu.
1 The four Nikâyas or Âgamas; c]: Yinayapitaka, vol. Í. p. xl.
2 Sâriputrftbhidharma-sâ.....tra; if. TIea], CataZU!Jlle, p. 80.
S Dcal, Catalo!Jue, p. 3G.

ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN. 201

In 420 the Tsin dynasty came to an end.
The Elnpel'Or ThaÌ-\vu (4:24-452), of the N. vVei
dynasty, persecuted the Buddhists, 446 ; but frol11 the
year 452 they ,,-ere tolerated. This dynasty lasted
frOlll 386 to 535, ,vhen it was divitled into t\vo.
In 458 there ,vas a conspiracy under Buddhist in-
fluences, and III ore stringent la\vs ,vere enforced against
thelu.
In 460 five B uddhists arrived in China frol11 Cey-
lon, viâ Tibet. T\vo of thenl, Yashaita, and Vucla-
nandi, brougbt images. 1 In 50 a Hindu translated
1\Iahftyâna books, called Fixed Positions antl Ten
Positions. 2
During tbe dynasties of I(hî (479-502), Liang
(502-557), and Kltin (557 -589), nlany faulous Shâ-
mans canle to China, and translated books.
1"'he Enlperor VVÛ of Liang (502-549) paid grcat
honor to Butltlhislll. He nlade a large collection of
the Buddhist canonical books, anlounting to 5,400
vohunes, in the H ,vâ-lin garden. The Shâlnan Pao-
kllang cOlllpiled the catalogue in fifty-four fascicles.
In the period Y ung-ping, 508-511, there was an
Indian Shânlan Bodhiruki, who translated many
books, as J{unlâragîva had done. A lHong them were
the Earth-holding sâstra (bhûmîdbara ðâstra?) and
the Shi-ti-killg-Iun, the Ðasabhûn1Ïka sâstra, greatly
valued by the follo\vers of the 1\lahâyâna.3
In 51ü, during the period Hsî-phing, the Chinese
Shâlllan vVei-shang was sent to the \Vest to collect
Sûtras and Vinayas, and brought back a collection
of 170 books. lIe is not, how:ever, lnentioned as a
translator in the I('ai-yuen-lu.

1 Edkins, l. c. 2 lbid.
3 Beal, Cfltalo[Jue, p. 77; on p. 20 a translation of the Lankâvatâra is
mentioned.

202 ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN J AP AN.

In 518 Sung-yull, sent by the queen of the 'Vei
country frolll La-yang to India, returned after three
years, with 175 vohul1es. He lived to see Bodhi-
dharma in his coffin. This Bodhidharma, the t\venty-
eighth patriarch, had arrived in Canton by sea in 528,
in the tilne of W u-ti, the first Enlperor of the Liang
dynasty. Some Sanskrit 1\1:8S. that had belonged to
him, and other relics, are still preserved in J apan. 1
In the tinle of the Enlperor WÛ, of the Northern
Kâu dynasty (561-577), a 8hâlnan, 'Vei-yii.all-sung,
accused the Buddhist priests, and the Enlperor per-
secuted them. But in the first year of I{ao-tsu, the
founder of the Sui dynasty, in 589, toleration ,vas
again proclaiIl1ed. He ortlered the people to pay a
certain sunl of 1110ney, according to the number of the
Inell1bers of each fan1ily, for the purpose of preparing
Sûtras (the BudJhist canon) and inlages. And the
Governll1ent caused copies of the ,vhole Buddhist
canon to be made, and placed theln in certain temples
or monasteries in the capital, and in several other
large cities, in such provinces as Ping-kâu, Hsiang-
kâll, Lo-kâu, etc. And the Governluent caused also
another copy to be made and to be deposited in the
Imperial Library. The Buùdhist sacred books among
the people were found to be several hundred "tinles
more nlunerous than those on the six I{illgs of Con-
fucius. There were 1,950 distinct Buddhist books
translated.
In the period Tâ-yeh (605-616) the Emperor or-
dered the 8hâlnan Ki-k\vo to conlpose a catalogue of
the Buddhist books at the Illlperial Buddhist chapel
,vithin the gate of. the palace. lIe then Inade SOlne
divisions and classifications, \vhich \vere as follo\vs :-
1 See Atltenæum, August 7, 1880; and infra, p. 370.

ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN. 203

The 8ûtras ,vhich contained ,vbat Buddha had
spoken were arranged under three divisions: -
1. The 1\1ahâyâna.
2. The Hîna y âna.
3. The Mixed 8 ûtras.
Other books, tbat seemed to be the productions of
later men, ,vho falsely ascribed their works to greater
nanles, were classed as Doubtful Books.
There \vere other .works in which Dodhisattvas and
others went deeply into the explanation of the Inean-
ing, and illustrated the principles of Buddha. These
,vere called Disquisitions, or J8âstras. 'l-'ben there
\vere Vinaya, or c0l11pilations of prccepts, under each
division as before, l\lahâyâna, Hînayâna, l\Iixed.
'There \vere also Records, or accounts of the doings
in their tÏ1nes of those who had been students of the
SysteIll. Altogether there \vere eleven classes under
\vhich the books \vere arranged: -

1. Sútra. l\Iahâyâna 617 in 2,076 chapters.
HînaYttna 487 " 852 "
l\Iixed 380 " 716 "
l\Iixed and doubtful 172 " 336 "
2. Vinaya. l\Iahâyfìlla 52 " 91 "
Htnayfìna 80 " 472 "
1\1 ixed 27 " 46 "
3. Sâstra. l\Iahftyâna 35 " 141 "
IIînayåna 41 " 567 "
l\Iixed 51 " 437 "
Records 20 " 46-1 "

1,962 6,198

Searclt for Sanskrit ]JISS. ,in Ohina.
It was the publication of Hiouen-thsang's Travels
which roused the hopes of Professor "\Vilson that
some of the old Sanskrit 1\188. which had been car-

204 ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN.

ried away frolH India Il1ight still be discovered III
China.!
But though no pains ,yere spared by Sir John Do,v-
ring to carry out I>rofessor \Vilson's ,vi shes, though
he had catalogues sent to hin1 fron1 Buddhist libra-
l'ies, and froin cities ,vhere Buddhist C0111positions
Inigbt be expected to exist, the results were disap-
pointing, at least so far. as Sa.nskrit texts ,vere con-
cerned. A nun1 ber of interesting Chinese books,
translated froB1 Sanskrit Ly Hiouell-thsang and oth-
ers, ,yorks also by native Chinese 13uddhists, ,vere
sent to the library of the East India House; but
what Professor \Vilson and all Sanskrit scholars 'with
hin1 1110st ùesired, Sanskrit l\ISS., or copies of San-
skrit 1\ISS., \vere not forthcolning. Professor \V ilson
showed nle, inde
d, one copy of a Sanskrit 1\18. that
,vas sent to hinl frolll China, and, so far as I l'eIl1e1l1-
ber, it ",yas the I
âla-l(itkra,2 \vhich ,ve kno\v as one
of the books translatéd froln. Sanskrit into Chinese.
'That 1\IS., however, is no longer to be found in the
India Oflice Library, though it certainly existed in
the old East India House.
The disappoinbnent at the failure of Professor
'Vilson's and Sir ,}. Bo,vl'ing"s united efforts ,vas felt
all the nlore keenly because neither Sanskrit nor
Chinese schslars could surrender the conviction that,
until a very short tilne ago, Indian l\1SS. had existed
in China. 1'hey had been seen by Europeans, such
as Dr. Glltzlaff, the harù-,vorking 11lissionary in China,

1 A long list of Sanskrit tex.ts translated into Chinese may he found in
the Jow"nal .AÛatique, IS4!), p. 3;)3 seq., s. t. "Concordance Sinico-Sams-
krite d'un noml)l.c considérable de titres d'ouvrag-ps ßouùdhiques, recueiIIie
dans un Catalogue Chinois de l' an 1306, par l\L Stanislas J ul icn."
2 Csoma Kiirüsi, As. Res. vol. xx. p. 418. JOllrnal .Asiati{Jlw, 1849,
p. 356.

ON SAKSKTIIT TEXTS DISCOVETIED IN JAPAN. :203

who in a paper, ,vritten shortly before his death, anJ
aL1dressed to Colonel Sykes e' Journal It j\. S." 1856,
p. 73), stated that he hinlself hat! seen Pâli ì\ISS.
preserved by Dudclhist priests in China. 'Vhether
these l\lSS. \vere in Pâli or Sanskrit \vollld Blatter
littlp, supposing even that Dr. Gutzlaff could not
distinguish bet\veen the t\vo. He speaks ,vith grcat
contenlpt of the whole Buddhist literature. There
,vas not a single priest, he Sê\'YS, capable of explain-
ing the n1eaning of the Påli texts, though SOlne ,vere
interlined \vith Chinese. " A fe\v works," he \vrites,
" are found in a character originally used for \vl'iting
the Pâli, and nlay be considered as faithful tran-
scripts of the earliest \vritings of Duddhisln. 1"'hey
are looked upon as very sacred, full of Inysteries anù
deep significations, anù therefore as the 1110St pre-
cious relics of the founder of their creed. \V ith the
letters of this alphabet the priests perfonl1 incanta-
tions 1 to expel denlons, rescue sonls fr0111 hen, bring
dü\vn rain on the earth, renlove calanÜties, etc. 1
hey
turn and twist thell1. in every shape, and Inaintain
that the very denlons trelnble at the l'ecitation of
theine "
Another clear proof of the existence of Sanskrit
l\ISS. in China is found in the account of a " r-rrip to
Ning-po and T'hëen-t'hae," by Dr. Edkins. .After
he had arrived at Fang-kwang, he ascended the II wa-
ling hill, and at the top of the hill he describes a
sinall tenlple \vith a priest residi ng in it. " Scat-
tered over the hill," he aLIas, "there are various lit-
tle tmnples where priests reside, but the one at the
top is the nlost celebrated, as being the place \vhere
Che-k'hae spent a pOTtion of his tillle, \vorshipping
1 Cf Dcal, Catalogue, p. GG.

206 ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN.

a Sanskrit nlanuscript of a Buddhist classic." On
his return he arrived at the pagoùa erected to the
nlel110ry of Che-k'hae, the founder of the Thëen-t 'hae
systeln of Buddhism, in the Chin dynasty (about 580
A. D.). And a little farther on, situated in a deep
dell on the left, was the nlonastery of ICaon-nling-sze.
This is particularly celebrated for its possession of a
Sanskrit l\lS., written on the pahn leaf, once read
and eXplained by Che-k'hae, but no\v unintelligible
to any of the follo\vers of Buddhism in these parts.
The priests seemed to pay unCOlnlnon reverence to
this
fS., which is the only one of the kind to be
found in the East of China, and thus of great iln-
portance in a litera.ry point of vie\v. It is lllore than
1,300 years 01d, but is in a state of perfect preserva-
tion, in consequence of the paltn leaves, ,vhich are
written on both sides, having been carefully let into
slips of wood, which are fitted on the sanle central
pin, and the \vhole, all10unting to fifty leaves, in-
closed in a rosewood box.
rrhis may account for the unwillingness of the
priests to part \vith their old 1\IS8., ,vhether Sanskrit
or Pâli, but it proves at the same tiule that they still
exist, and naturally keeps up the bope that SOlue day
or other we may still get a sight of theln.
Maten.aZs on which Sanskrit MSJ.
. were written.
Of course, it nlight be said that if l\lSS. did not
last very long ih India, neither \vollld they do so in
China. But even then, ,ve nlight expect at least
that as in India the old l\iSS. \vere copied whenever
they showed signs of decay, so they \vonld bave been
in China. llesiùes, the clilnate of China is not so
destructive as the heat and 1110isture of the clÏ111ate

ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN. 207

of India. In India, l\ISS. selJOlll last o
er a thou-
sand years. Long before that tinle paper lllade of
vegetable substances decays, pahn-Ieaves and birch-
bark becolne brittle, and ,vhite ants often destroy
wbat nlight have escaped the ravages of the cliIllate.
It ,vas the duty, therefore, of Indian l{ajahs to keep
a staff of librarians, ,vho bad to copy the old 1\188.
whenever they began to seeill unsafe, a fact which
accounts Loth for the lllodern date of most of our
Sanskrit MSS. and for the large nunl bel' of copies of
the saIne text often Inet ,vith in the saIne library.
The 1VISS. carried off to China \vere in all likeli-
hood not \vritten on paper, or whatever we like to
call the 1l1aterial which N earchus describes" as cotton
\vell beaten together," 1 but on the bark of the birch
tree or on palin leaves. The bark of trees is 111én-
tioned as a writing material used in InJia by Cur-
tius ; 2 and in nuddhist Sûtras, such as the I(aranda-
vyûha (p. 69), ,ve actually read of b h û r 9 a, birch,
m â s i, ink, and k a r a 111 a (k a I a nl), as the com-
mon requisites for writing. MSS. ,vritten on that
material have long been kno\vn in Europe, chiefly as
curiosities (I had to write many years ago about one
of theIn, preserved in the Library at All Souls' Col-
lege). Of late,3 however, they have attracted more
serious attention, particularly since Dr. Bühler dis-
covered in ICashn1Ïr old
ISS. containing independent
rescensions of Vedic texts, written on birch bark.
One of these, containing the whole text of the Rig-
Veda Samhitâ 4 ,vith accents, ,vas sent to Ine, and
1 The modern paper in Nepal is said to date from 500 years ago (Hodg-
son, Essays).
2 1\'1. l\I., HìstOf'y of Ancient Sansk1'it Literature, p. 516.
8 Burnell, South Indian Palæofjl'ophy, 2ù ed. p. 84: S('].
4: See Sacred Books of the East, vol. i., Upanishads, Introduction, p.
lxxviii.

203 ON SAKSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN.

though it 11ad suffered a good Jeal, particularly on
the lnargins, it shows that there was no difficulty in
producing froB1 the bark of the birch tree thousands
and thousands of pages of the largest quarto or even
folio size, perfectly sl1100th and )?ure, except for the
sll1all dark lines peculiar to the bark of that tree. l
At the tilue of Hiouen-thsang, in the seventh cent-
ury, palIn leaves seen1 to have been the chief mate-
rial for ,vriting. He ll1entions a forest of palIn-trees
(Bo1"assus flabelliforrnis) near I{onkanapnra (the

1 Dr. Bühler (J ow'nal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Bomùay, 1877, p.
29) has the following interesting remarks: "The llhûrga 1\188. are written
on specially-prepared thin sheets of the inner bark of the Himalayan birch
(Bætula BludlJat1" "
allich), and invariably in Sâradâ characters, The
lines run always parallel to the narrow side of the leaf, and the 1\188. pre-
sent, therefore, the appearance of European books, not of Indian 1\[88"
which owe their form to an imitation of the TÙlapatras. The lIimfllaya
seems to contain an inexhaustible supply of birch hark, which in Kasmîr
and other hill countries is used both instead of paper by the shopkeepers
in the bazaars, and for Jining the roofs of houses in order to make them
water-tight. It is also exported to India, where in many places it is like-
wise u!'ed for wrapping up parcels, and plays an important part in the
manufacture of the flexible pipe-stems used by hukâ smokers. To give an
idea of the quantities which are brought into Srînagar, I may mention that
on one single day I counted fourteen large barges with birch bark on the
river. . . . . The use of birch bark for literary purposes is attested by the
earliest classical Sanskrit writers. Kâlidft
a mentions it in his dramas
and epics; Sustuta, Vadhamihira (cÜ.ca 500-530 A, D.) know it likewise.
As is the case with nearly all old customs, the use of birch bark for writ-
ing still survives in India, though the fact is little known. Mantras,
which are worn as amulets, are written 011 pieces of Bhûrga with ashtau
gandh:îh, a mixture 'of eight odoriferous substances - e. g. camphor, san-
dal, tumeric - which ,'ary according to the deity to which the writing is
dedicated. The custom prevails in Bengal as well as in Gujarftt. Dirch-
bark 1\188. occur in Orissa. The Petersburg Dictionary refers to a pas-
!'age in the Kâthaka, the redaction of the Yajurveda formerly current in
Kasmîr, where the word Dhûrga occurs, though it is not clear if it is men:"
tioned there too as material for writing on. The Kasmirian Pandits as
ert,
and apparently with good reason, that in Kasmîr all books were written on
bhûrgapattras from the earliest times until after the conquest of the Val-
Icy by Akbar, about 200-250 years ago. Akbar introduced the manufact-
ure of paper, anù thus created an industry for which Kasmîr is now famous
in Inùia."

ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN. 209

'Vest ern coast of the Dekhan),l \v hich was n1 uch
prized on account of its supplying Inaterial for \vrit-
ing (vol. i. p. 202, and vol. iii. p. 148). At a later
time, too, in 965, \ve read of Buddhist priests return-
ing to China \vith Sanskrit copies of Buddhist books
\vritten on palIn leaves epe i t 0).2 If we could be-
lieve Hiouen-thsê:tl1g, the paln1 leaf \vould have been
used even so early as the first Buddhist Council,3 for
he says that I
âsyapa then wrote the Pitakas on palIn
leaves (tâla), and spread thell1 over the \vhole of
India. In the Pâli Gâtakas, pan n a is used in the
sense of letter, but originally par n a lneant a wing,
then a leaf of a tree, then a leaf for writing. Pat t a,
also, \vhicb is used in the sense of a sheet, was origi-
nally pattra, a \ving, a leaf of a tree. Suvanna-
pat t a, a golden leaf to \vrite on, still sho\vs that the
original \vriting n1aterial had been the leaves of trees,
nlost likely of palm-trees. 4 Potthaka, i. e. pus-
taka, book, like,vise occurs in the Pâli Gâtakas. 5
Such 1\188., written on palIn leaves, if preservetl
carefully and ahnost \vorshipped, as they Seell1 to
have been in China, Inight ,veIl have survived to the
present day, and they \vould certainly prove of im-
mense value to the students of lluddhislll, if they
could still be recovered, whether in the original or
even in later copies.
It is true, no doubt, that, like aU other religions,
Buddhislll too had its periods of trial and perspcntion
in China. "\Ve kno\v that during such periotls - as,

1 Dr. Burnell, InÛian Anti'lurzry, 1880, p. 234, shows that Koñkanapura
is KoÚkanahlli in the
rysore territory.
2 Heal's T-J.avels of Buddhist Pil!ll'ims, Introd. p. xlvi.
3 Pèlc'J'ins B(JUdtlltistes, yol. i. p. 158.
4 Fansböl1, Dasal.atlw:jiitaka, p. 25.
6 See, also. AILiruui, as quotell by Reinaud, J.}[émoÜ.e sm. l'IncZe, p. 305.
VUL. v. 14

210 ON SANSKIUT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN.

for instance, in 845, under the Enlperor \tV ll-tsung-
11lonasteries \vere destroyed, inlages broken, and books
burnt. But these persecutions seen1 never to have
lasted long, and when they were over, ll10nasteries,
tenlples, and pagodas soon sprang np again, Ï111ages
\yere restored, and books collected in greater abun-
dance than ever. Dr. Edkins tells us that "in an
account of the I{o-t'sing monastery in the History of
T'ian-t'ai-shan it is said that a single work ,vas saved
fron1 a fire there several centuries ago, 'which was
,vritten on the Pei-to (Pe-ta,) or pahllleaf of In-
dia." He also states that great pagodas were built
011 purpose as safe repositories of Sanskrit MSS., one
being erected by the Emperor for the preservation of
the ne,vly arrived Sanskrit books at the request of
llionen-thsang, lest they should be injured for 'want
of care. It was 180 feet high, had five stories \vith
grains of She-li (relics) in the centre of each, and
contained 111011Ull1ents inscribed ,vith the prefaces
written by the Enlperor or Prince Royal to Hiouen-
thsang's translations.

Search for Sanskrit MSS. in Japan.
Being n1yself convinced of the existence of old In-
dian l\fSS. in China, I lost no opportunity, during
the last five-al1d-t\venty years, of asking any friends
of n1Ïne ,vho went to Cbina to look out for these
treasures, but - ,vith no result!
Sonle years ago, ho\vever, Dr. Edkins, who had
.. taken an active part in the search instituted by Pro-
fessor Wilson and Sir J. Bo\vring, showed me a book
which he bad brought frolu Japan, and which con-
tained a Chinese vocabulary with Sanskrit equiva.-
lents and a transliteration in. Japanese. rrbe San-

ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN. 211

skrit is written in that peculiar alphahet which we
find in the old l\ISS. of Nepftl, and ,vhich in China
bas been further luodified, so as to give it an ahuost
Chinese appearance.
That 1\IS. revived n1Y hopes. If such a book was
published in Japan, I concluded that there must have
been a tilne \v hen such a book was useful there-
that is to say, when the Buddhists in Japan studied
Sanskrit. Dr. Edkins kindly left the book ,vith me,
and though the Sanskrit portion ,vas full of blunders,
yet it enabled n1e to become accustomed to that pecul-
iar alphabet in which the Sanskrit words are written.
'Vhile I ,vas looking forward to n10re inforn1ation
fronl Japan, good luck would have it that a young
Buddhist priest, 1\11'. Bunyiu Nanjio, came to me from
Japan, in order to learn Sanskrit and Pâli, and thus
to be able in time to read the sacred writings of the
Buddhists in their original language, and to co 111 pare
them ,vith the Chinese and Japanese translations
no\v current in his country. After a tilne, another
Buddhist priest, 1\11'. l{asawara, came to me for the
san1e purpose, and both are no\v working very hard
at learning Sanskrit. Japan is supposed to contain
34,388,504 inhabitants, all of WbOlU, "\vith the excep-
tion of about 1 or 200,000 follo\vers of the Shintð re-
ligion,! are Buddhists, divided into ten principal sects,
the sect to ,yhich 1\11'. Bunyiu Nanjio belongs being
that of the Shinshiu. One of the first questions
which I asked l\Ir. Bunyiu N anjio, when he came to
read Sanskrit with me, was about Sanskrit MSS. in
Japan. I showed hiln the Chinese-Sanskrit-Japanese
Vocabulary which Dr. Edkins had left with nle, and
he soon admitted that Sanskrit texts in the saIne al-

1 See Letter to the Times, "On the Religions of Japan," Oct. 20, 1880.

212 ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAr AN.

phabet 111ight be found in Japan, or at all events in
China. lIe ,vrote hOllle to his friends', and after
,vaiting for SOlne til11e, he brought l11e in Decelnber
last a book ,vhich a Japanese scholar, Shuntai Is-
hikawa., had sent to Ine, a.nd ,vhich he ,vished nle
to correct, and then to send back to him to Japan.
I did not see at once the Ï111portance of the book.
nut ,vhen I can1e to read the introductory fornulla,
Evanl lllayâ srutanl, "Thus by me it has been
heard," the typical beginning of the Buddhist Sûtras,
my eyes were opened. II ere, then, was what I had
so long been looking forward to - a Sanskrit text,
carried frOll1 India to China, from China to Japan,
written in the peculiar Nepalese alphabet, with a
Chinese translation, and a transliteration in J apan-
ese. Of course, it is a copy only, not an original
1\18.; but copies presuppose originals at SOllle tinle or
other, and, such as it is, it is a first instaltl1ent, ,vhich
tells us that ,ve ought not to despair, for ,vhere one
of the long-sought-for literary treasures that 'v ere
taken froln Inùia to China, and afterwards froll1
China to Japan, bas been discovered, others are sure
to come to light.
\Ve do not possess yet very authentic inforn1ation
on the ancient history of Japan, and on the intro-
duction of Buddhism into that island. 1\1. Léon de
Rosny 1 and the l\Iarquis D'IIervey de Saint-Denys 2
have given us sOHle inforn1ation on the subject, and
I hope that 1\11'. I3unyiu Nanjio ,vill soon give us a
trustworthy account of the ancient history of his
country, drawn froln native authorities. "\Vhat is

1 ,. Le Douddhismc dans l'extrème Orient," R(vue Scientifiqlle, DG'-
cemhre, 187!).
2 JUlll'mtl As;rltique, 1871, p. 38G se'].

ON SA
SKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN.
13

told us about the conversion of Japan to Buddhisln
has a somewhat legendary aspect, ana I shall only se-
lect a few of the nlore important facts, as they have
been cOlnmunicated to llle by )ny Sanskrit pupil.
Dudùhisn1. first reached Japan, not directly frOJn
China, but fronl Corea, which had been converted to
Duddhisn1. in the fourth century A. D. In the year
200 A. D. Corea had been conquered by the J çtpanese
En1press Zingu, and the intercourse thus established
between the t\VO countries led to the ilnportatioll of
Buddhist doctrines fron1. Corea to Japan. In the
year 552 A. D. one of the Corean kings sent a bronze
statue of Buddha and n1a
lY sacred books to the
Court of Japan, and after various vicissitudes, nud-
dhisnl became the established religion of the ishu1l1
about 600 A. D. Japanese students ,vere sent to
China to study Buddhisnl, and they brought back
,vith then1 large numbers of Buddhist books, chiefly
translations from Sanskrit. In the year 640 A. D.
,ve hear of a translation of the Sukhavatîvyûhanla-
hâyâna-sûtra being read in Japan. This is the title
of the Sanskrit text now sent to IHe frOln Japan.
The translation bad been Inade by I{ô-sû-gai (in
Chinese, Khang-sang-khai), a native of Tibet, though
living in India, 252 A. D., and we are told that there
had been eleven other translations of the sanle text. l
Anlong the teachers of these Japanese students we
find onr old friend Riouen-thsang, whom the J apan-
ese call Genziô. In the year 653 a Japanese priest,
Dosho by naIne, studied under GenziÛ, adopted the
views öf the sect founded by hiln, - the RossÛ sect,
- and brought back ,vith him to Japan a cOlnpila-

1 Fiye of these tr::m"lations were introduce(l into Japan; the others seem
to h:we been lost in Chilla. The trall:-:latiolIl:! are spol...C11 of as "the five
in cxi:-:tence allli the SC\ ell Uli
::;ing."

214 ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN.

tion of conlnlentaries on the thirty verses of Vasn-
handhu, written by Dharmapfila, and translated by
Genziô. Two other priests, Chitsû and Cbitatsu,
likewise becatl1e his pupils, and introduced the fa
Inous Abbidbarnla-kosha-sâstra into Japan, which
had been composed by Vasubandbu, and translated
by Genzi8. They seem to have favored the Hîna.
yâna, or the views of the Sll1all Vehicle (I{ushashiu).
In tbe year 736 we hear of a translation of the
Buddhß,vabuì1saka-vaipulya-sûtra, by Buddhabhadra
and others 1 (317-419 A. D.), being received in Japan,
like,vise of a translation of the Saddharllla-pundarîka
by l{umaragîva. 2
And, what is more important still, in the ninth
century we are told that I{ukai (died 835), the
founder of tbe Shingon sect in Japan, was not only a
good Chinese, but a good Sanskrit scholar also. Nay,
one of his disciples, 8hinnyo, in order to perfect his
knowledge of Buddhist literature, undertook a jour-
ney, not only to China, but to India, but died before
he reached that country.
These short notices, ,vhich I owe cbiefly to 1\fr.
nunyiu N anjio, nlake it quite clear that ,ve have
every right to expect San
krit 1\188., or, at all events,
Sanskrit texts, in Japan, and the specilnen ,vhich I
have received encourages nle to hope that SOHle of
these Sanskrit texts nlay be older than any ,vhich ex
ist at present in any part of India.

The Sukhavatî-vyûha.
The text ,vhich was sent to me bears the title of
Sukhâ va.tî -vyûha-l1lahâ yâl1a-sûtra. 3
1 See p. 1!J2. 2 See p. 1!J2.
3 The .l\[SS. \ ary hetween Sllkhayatî and Suh.l1âvatî.

ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN. 215

This is a title well known to all students of Bud-
dhist literature. Bl1rnouf, in his "Introduction à
l'IIistoire du Bl1c1c1hisn1e" (pp. 99-102),1 gave a short
account of this Sûtra, ,vhich enables us to see that
the scene of the dialogue was laid at Râgagriha, and

tbat the t,vo speakers were Bhagavat and Ananda.
\Ve saw before, in the historical account of Bud-
dhism in Japan, that no less than twelve Chinese
translations of a ,vork bearing the same title were
lnentioned. The Chinese tell us at least of five trans-
lations ,vhich are still in existence. 2
Those of tbe Han and \V u dynasties (25-280
A. D.), ,ve are told, ,vere too diffuse, and those of the
later periods, the T'ang and Sung dynasties, too lit-
eral. The best is said to be that by IÜ)-sô-gai, a
priest of Tibetan descent, which ,vas Inade during the
early \Vei dynasty, about 252 A. D. This Inay be
the saIne \vhich was read in Japan in 640 A. D.
The sanle Sûtra exists also in a Tibetan transla-
tion, for there can be little doubt that the Sûtra
quoted by Csonla I{örösi (" As. Res.'.' vol. xx. p.
408) under the nalne of Alnitâbha-vyûha is the same
,york. It occupies, as 1\[, Léoll Feer illforn1s me,
fifty-four leaves, places the scene of the dialogue at
Râgagriha, on the n10ulltain Gridhra-kûta, and in-
^
troc1uces Bhagavat and Ananda as the principal
speakers.
There are Sanskrit 1\1SS. of the Sukba.vatî-vyûha
in your own Library, in Paris, at Calnbriùge, and at
Oxford.
The following is a list of the l\1SS. of the Sukha-
vatî-vyûha, hitherto kno\vn : -

1 See, also, Lotus de in bonne Loi, p. 2G7.

Journal oftltC R.
J. s. 185G, p. 31!).

216 ON S
\XSKRIT TEXTS DISCOYERED IN JAPAN.

1. 1\18. of the Royal Asiatic Society, London
(IIodgson Collection), No. 20. Sukhavatîvyûha-
n1ahâyÍìnasûtra, sixty-five leaves. Dated SalllVat 934
== A. D.1814. It begins: Nan10 dasadiganalltâparyan-
talokadhâtuprati::;htitebLyalt, etc. Eval1L n1ay sru-
tan1 ekasll1i?n salnaye Bhagavân Râgagrihe viharati
Slna. It ends: Snkhâvatîvyûha-nuthâyânasûtra1J
sa 111 [ìpta?n. Salnvat 934, kârttikasudi 4, s
mlpÛrJlanl
hI ^ S " ". h " 1\1 . " ^ .
a lute nsuvarnapal
arllna anagare altnpUl'ln1a-
} " .1.^ 8 " " } } " "1" G ^
laVluare rlV:.L
vayra( asa vagntlcaryasya ay an an-
dasya ka sarvfìrthasiddheh. eN epalese alphabet.)
2. 1\18. of the Dibliothèque Nationale, Paris (Col-
lection Dllrnollf), No. 85; sixty-four leaves. It be-
gins, after a prcalllble of five lincs, Eva7n 111ayâ
sl'utamluekasn1Í stunaya Bhagavân I{tLgagrihe viharati
snla Gridhrakute parvvate lllahatâ Bhikshllsanghena
sârddhalll. Dv
tril1lsratâ Dhikshusahasrailt. It ends:
nhagavato ]nitâbhasya gunaparikîrttalla?n Bodhisat-
tvân1a vai vartyabh ûlni pra vesalt. AnI itâ Lha vyuhapa-
rivartta/z. Sukhâvatîvyûhalt sanlpurnalt. Iti Srt
An1Ìtâbhasya Sukhâvatîvyuha nâÜuL luahâ.rânastûra?n
samâptam. 1 (Devanågarî alphabet.)
3. l\IS. of the Sociótó Asiatique at Paris (Collec-
tion Hodgson), No. 17; eighty-t,vo leaves. (Nepalese
alphabet.) 2
4. 1\18. of the University Library at Call1bridge,
No. 1368; thirty-five leaves. It begins ,vith SOHle
lines of prose and verse in praise of Alnitâbha and
Sukhavatî, and then proceeds: Evam mayâ srutam
ekasmi?n samaye Bhagavân Râgagrihe nagare viharati
Sll1a, GriL1hrakûtaparvate ll1ahatâ Bhikshusanghena
sttrddha, etc. It ends: iti srîlllad atnitâbhasya tath
-

1 I owe this information to the kindness of 1\1. Léon Feel' at Paris.
2 See JOllJ'nal A.:iatirJ1te, ad scrie
, vol. iii. p. 31G; vol. iv. p. 2
G-2!)8.

ON SAXSKIUT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAr AN. 217

gatasya Sukha,vatîvyûha-nlahâyânasûtran samftptam.
(Nepalese alphabet, 111oderll.)
5. 1\IS. giyen by 1\1r. IIodgson to the Bodleian Li-
brary Oxford (Hodgson 3). It begins \vith: Om
nan10 ratnatrayftya. On1 nan1alt sarvabuddhabodhisat-
tvebhyah, etc. Then Eva}} Inayå sruta.n1, etc. It
(lulls with sukhavfttîvyûh:unahâyftnasutraul saluâp-
tanto (Nepalese alphabet, l11odern.)
nnt \Vhell I caIne to c01l1pare these Sanskrit 1\fSS.
\vith the text sent to n1e froln J apall, though the
title \vas the saIne, I soon perceived that their con-
tents \vere different. 'VlIile the text, as given in tbe
ordinary Devanâgari or Nepalese l\ISS., fills about
fifty to sixty leayes, the text of the Sûtra that reached
H1e froll1 Japan would hardly occupy rnore tha.n eight
or ten leaves.
I soon convinced myself that tllis
IS. was not a
text abbreviated in Japan, for this shorter text, sent to
lue froll1 Japan, correspond in every respect with the
Chinese Sûtra translated by l\Ir. neal in his "Ca-
tena," pp. 378-383, and published in your Journal,
1866, p. 136. No doubt the Chinese translation, on
which 1\Ir. Real's translation is based, is not only
free, but displays the lnisapprehensions peculiar to
nlany Chinese renderings of Sanskrit texts, dne to a
deficient knowledge either of Sanskrit or of Chinese
on the part of the translators, perhaps also to the
different genius of those two languages.
Yet, such as it is, there can be no doubt that it
was meant to be a translation of the text now in n1Y
possession. l\Ir. Beal tells us that the translation he
follo\ved is that by I\:un1âragîva, the conteInporary of
Fa-hian (400 .A. D.), and that this translator olnitted
l'epetitiollS and superfluities ill the text.! 1\11". Edkins
1 J. R. A. S. 186ü p. 136.

218 ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN.

knowS' a translation, 8. t. 'V ou-liang-sheu-king, l11ade
under the Ran dynasty.1 'Vbat is Ï1nportallt is that
in the Chinese translation of the shorter text the scene
is laid, as in the Japanese Sanskrit text, at Srâvastî,
and the principal speakers are Bhagavat and Sâri-
putra.
There is also a Tibetan translation of the short
text, described by CSOll1a I{örösi (" As. Res." vol. xx.
p. 439). Here, though the llanle of the scene is not
Jl1entioned, the speakers are Bhagavat and Sâriputra.
The ,vhole work occupies seven leaves only, and the
names of the sixteen principal disciples agree with
the ,Japanese text. The translators ,vere Pragnâvar-
nlan, Sûrendra, and the Tibetan Lotsava Ya-shes-sde.
M. Feel' informs l11e that there is at the National
I..Iibrary a Chinese text called O-mi-to-king, i. e.
A n1Ïtfibha-sûtra. 2 The scene is at Srâvastî; the
speakers are nhagavat Sâriputra.
Another text at the National Library is caned
Ta-o-mi-to-king, i. e. 1\1 ahâ Amitâbha-sûtra, and here
the scene is at Râgagriha.
There is, besides, a third ,york, called I{ ,van-wou-
lia.llg-sheu-king by I(iang-ling-yc-she, i. e. I(âlayasas,
a foreigner of the 'Vest, ,vho lived in China about
424 A. D.

1 J. R. A. S. 1866, p. 136.
2 Beal, Catalogue, p. 23. J. R. A. S. 1856, p. 319. Deal, Catalogue,
p. 77, mentions also an Amitâbha-sûtra-upmlesa-siìstra, by Vasubandhu,
translated by Boùhiruki OV ou-liang-shen-king-yeou-po-ti-she). There is
an Amitn.bha-sûtra, translated by Chi-hien of the \V.u period - i. e. 222-
280 A. D. - mentioned in Mr. Deal's Catalogue oftlle Buddhist T1'ipitaka,
p. 6. The next Sûtra, which he cans the Sûtra of measureless year!':, is
no doubt the Amitâyus-sûtra, Amitftyus being another name for Amitâbha
(Fu-shwo-wou-liang-sheu-king, p. G). See, also, Catnlogue, pp. !:ID, 102.
Dr. Edkins also, in his
NlJti('('s (if Buddhism in China, spE'aks of a transla-
tion of "the Sûlra of boul\lllcss a
e," by Fa-t'ian-pun, a nalÌve of l\Ia-
gadha, who was a
sisled in his tran
latioll by a native of China familiar
with Sallsl{rit, ahout 1000 A. u.

ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN. 21 g

"\Ve have, therefore, historical evidence of the ex-
istence of three Sûtras, describing Sukhavatî, or the
Paradise of Amitâbha. vVe know t,vo of then1 in
Sa.nskrit, Chinese, and Tibetan - one long, the
other short. The third is known as yet in Chinese
only.
Of the two Sanskrit texts, the one from Nepal,
the other from Japan, the latter seems certainly tbe
earlier. But even the fuller text must have existed
at a very early tilne, because it was translated by
Ki-lau-kia:-khai, under the Eastern IIan dynasty (25-
220 A. D.) - i. e. at all events before 220 A. D.
The shorter text is first authenticated through
the translation of l{umâragÎva, about 400 A. D.; but
if the vie,vs generally entertained as to the relative
position of the longer and shorter Sûtras be correct,
we may safely claim for our short Sûtra a date ,vithin
the second century of our era.
vVhat Japan has sent us is, therefore, a Sanskrit
text, of ,vhich ,ve had no trace before, which must
have left India at least before 400 A. D., but probably
before 200 A. D., and which gives us the original of
that description of Amitâbha's Paradise, which for-
merly ,ve knew in a Chinese translation only, which
was neither complete nor correct.
The book sent to me was first published in Japan
in 1773, by Ziômi6, a Buddhist priest. The Sanskrit
text is intelligible, but full of inaccuracies, showing
clearly that the editor did not understand Sanskrit,
but simply copied ,vhat he saw before hin1. The
same words occurring in the same line ar written
differently, and the Japanese transliteration simply
repeats the blunders of the Sanskrit transcript.
There are t,vo other ecli tions of the sallIe text,

220 ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN.

published in 1794 A. D. by another Japanese priest,
named Hôgo. 'These are in the possession of l\Ir.
Bunyiu N anjio, and offered SOlne help in correcting
the text. One of them contains the - text and three
Chinese translations, one being nlerely a literal ren-
dering, ,vhile the other two have more of a literary
character and are ascribed to !{uInâragîva (400 A.
D.), and Hiouen-thsang (6:1:8 A. D.).
Lastly, there is another book by the saIne IIôgo,
in four volumes, in \vhich an
ttenlpt is n1ade to give
a gramma.tical analysis of the text. This, ho\vever,
as 1\[ r. Bunyiu Nanjio informs me, is very ill1perfect.
I have to-day brought with 111e the Japanese San-
sIn-it text, critically restored, and a literal translation
into English, to \vhich I have aùded a fe\v notes.

TRANSLATIO
.
Adoration to tlte Ornniscient.
This is \v hat I have heard. A tone tin1e the
Blessed (Bhagavat, i. e. Buddha) clwelt
t Srâvastî,l
in the Geta-grove, in the garden of Anû,thapindaka,
together \vith 2 a large COll1pany of Bhikshus (Inendi-
cant friars), viz \vith thirteen hundred Dhikshus, all
of thelll acquainted \vith the five kinds of knowledge,3

1 Srâvastî, capital of the N orthem KosaIas, residence of King Prase-
nagit. It wad in ruins when visited by Fa-hian (init. V. S
c.); not far
from the modem Fizabad. Cf. Hurnouf, Introduction, p. 22.
2 Sib.dha, with, the PÙli saddhim. Did not the frequent mention of
1,200 and a half (i. e. 1,230), 1,300 and a half (i. e. 1,350), persons ac-
companying Buddha arise from a misunderstanding of sârdha, meaning
originalJy "with a half" ?
3 Ahhi,ql1ânftLhig?zfttaih. The Japanese text reads abhigl1âtâbhâ,qmìtaih
-i. e. abhigñâtåbhigiìâtaih. If this were known to be the correct read-
ing, we should translate it by "known by known people," notus a viris
,wtis-i. e. well-known, famous. Abhi.'lñåta in the sense of known, fa-
mous, occurs in Lalita- Vistara, p. 25, and the Chillf'[';c translators adopted
that meaning here. Again, if we prefcrrcll the reading abhigiìâ.nâlJbigñíì.-

ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAr AN. 221

elders, great disciples,l and Arhats,2 such as Sâri-
putra, the elder, l\lahftnutudgalyâyana, l\fahâkâsyapa,
1\Iahttka pp h ina, l\lahâkâtyâ yana, l\Iahâkaush thila,
"-
Revata, Suddhipanthaka, Nanda, Ananda, Râhula,
Gavfttnpati, Bharad vâ!Ja, l{ftlodayin, Vakkula, and
Aniruddha.3 He dwelt together with these and
many other great disciples, and together with many
noble-n1Ïnded Bodhisattvas, such as l\Iañgusrî, the
prince, the Bodhisattva Agita, the Bodhisattva Gan-
dhahastin, the Bodhisattva Nityodyukta, the Bo-

taih, this, too, would admit of an intelligiùle rendering - viz. known or
distinguished by the marks or characteri
tics, the good qualities, that
ought to belong to a Bhikshu. But the technical meaning is "possessed
of a knowledge of the five aùhig17:î.s." It would be better in that case to
write ahhigñ:ltâbhigíìânaih, but no 1\ISS. seem to support that reading.
The five abhig1îâs or abhigíìânas which an .Arhat ought to possess are the
divine sight, the diyine hearing, the knowledge of the thoughts of others,
the rememhrance of former existences, and magic power. See Bumouf,
L()tus, Appendice, No. xÍ\r. The larger text of the Sukhavatîvyûha has
aùhig1lâllâbhiglîaih, and afterwards abhigñâtâùhiglîaih. The position of
the participle as.the uttara-pada in such compounds as abhiglîânâbhigilâ-
taih is common in Buddhist Sanskrit. 1\Ir. Bendall has called my atten-
tion to the Pâ1i aùhiññ
tta-aùhiíì1îâta (Villaya- pitaka, ed. Oldenberg, yol.
i. p. 4:1), which favors the Chinese acceptation of the term.
1 l\Jahâsr3.\raka, the great disciples; sometimes the eighty principal dis-
ciples.
2 Arhadbhih. I have left. the correct Sanskrit form, because the Japan-
ese text gives the termination adhhih' Hôgõ's text has the more usual
form arhantaih. The change of the old classical arhat into the Pàli arahan,
and then back into Sanskrit arhanta, arahanta, and at last arihanta, with
the meaning of " destroyer of the enemies" - i. e. the passions - shows
very clearly the different f;ta
es through which Sanskrit words passed in
the different phases of Buùdhist literature. In Tibet, in Mongolia, anù in
China, Arhat is translated by "destroyer of the enemy." See TIumouf,
Lotus, p. 287; Intmduction, p. 2!)5. Arhat is the title of the TIhikshu on
reaching the fonrth degree of perfection. Cf. Sûtra of the 42 Sections, cap.
2. Clemens of Alexandria (d. 220) speaks of the
E""VOL who worshippell
a pyrami(l erected over the relics of a god. Is this a translation of Arhat,
as Lassen (" De nom. Ind. philosoph." in Rhein. lIIuseum, vol. i. p. 187)
and Humouf (1 ntmduction, p. 2!)5) supposed, or a transliteration of Sa
mana? Clemens also speaks of
('/l-vaí. (Stromat. p. 53!), Potter).
8 Names of Diseiples in Sanskrit, I")àli, Chinese, Tibetan, and Japanese
1\188. Deal, J. R. .A. S. 18GG, p. 140: -

222 ON SA
SKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN.

dhisattva Anikshlptadhura. He dwelt together with
them and n1any other 110ble-nlillded Bodhisattvas,
and with Sakra, the Inch'a or ICing 1 of tbe Devas,
and with Bralllnan Sahftnlpati. 'Vith these and
n1anyother hundred thousanùs of Nayutas 2 of sons
of the gods, Bhagavat dwelt at Srãvastt

JAPANESE :MS. SANSKRIT. CHINESE. TIBETAN. PÂLI
(Burnouf, Lo- (Deal, Catena,
illS, pp. 1 and p.378.)
126.)
1 Sâriputra ßrlriputra Slriputra Sharihi-bu Sariputta
2 :Mahâmaud- Maudgalyâyana l\1audgalyâyana l\1ougal-gyi.bu Moggalâna
galyâyana
3 :Mahâkâsya- K
yapa K
.'iyapa ITodl;:rungs- Kassapa
pa eh'hcn-po
4 Mahâkap- Kapphina Kapphina (?) Kátyåhi-bu Kappina
phina
6 Mahflkâtyâ- Kâty!\.yana Kâtyâyana Kapina KakM.yana
yana
6 Mahâkaush- Kaushthila Mahâkotthila Gsus-poeh'he Kotthita
thila
'j Revata Revata Rcvata Nam-gru Revata
8 Suddhipan- (:Mahâpantha- Srutavimsati- Lam-p'hran- Mahâ pant-ha.-
thaka ( Su- ka?) koti bstan ka
di, MS.)
9 Nanda Sunanda? N anda Dgah-vo Nanda
10 Ânanda l\1ahâuanda Ananda Kundgahvo Ânanda
11 Râhula Râhula Râhula Sgra-gehan- Râhula
hdsin (Kumâra)
12 Gavâmpati Gavâmpati Gavâmpati Balang-bdag Gavampati
(Pindoda j
Pindola ?) (Pindolabhâ-
radva.ga)
13 Bharadvâga Dharadvâga Eharadvâga Eharadhwaja Ehâradvàga
14 Kâlodayin Kâlodayin Kâlâditya ITeh .har-bycd- Kfi.la"
nagpo ( tthera)
15 Vakkula Vakkula Vakula Vakula Vakkali
16 Anirudùha Aniruddha Aniruddha :Mahgags-p'a Anuruddha
(tthcra)

1 Indra, the old Vedic god, has come to mean simply lord, and in the
Kanda raritta (JoU1'nal Asiatique, 1871, p. 220) we actually find Asu-
rinda, the Indra or Lord of the Asuras.
2 The numbers in Buddhist literature, if they once exceed a Koti or
Kotî - i. e. ten millions - become very vague, nor is their value always
the same. Ayuta, i. e. a hundred Kotis; Niyuta, i. e. a hundred Ayutas;
and Nayuta, i. e. 1 with 22 zeros, are often confounded; nor does it mat-
ter much so far as auy definite idea is concerned which such numcrals
convey to our mind.

ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAr AN. 223

Then Bhagavat addressed the honored Sâriputra
and said: 0 Sâriputra, after you have passed frolu
here over a hundred thousand I{otis of Buddha-coun-
tries there is in tile"\V estern part of' a Buddha-coun-
try, a \vorld called Sukhavatî (the happy country).
And there a Tathâga.ta, called Alnitâyus, an Arhat,
fully enlightened, d\vells now, and remains, and sup-
ports hilllself, and teaches the Law. 1
N o\v \vhat do you think, Sâriputra, for what rea-
son is that world called Sukhavatî (the happy)? In
that world Sukhavatî, 0 Sâriputra, tbere is neither
bodily nor 111elltal pain for living beings. The sources
of happiness are innumerable there. For thàt reason
is that world ca.lled Sukhavatî (the happy).
And again, 0 Sâriputra, that world Sukhttvatî is
adorned with seven t
l'l'aces, \vith seven rows of
palm-trees, and \vith strings of bells. 2 It is inclosed
on every side,3 beautiful, brilliant with the four

1 Tishtltati dhriyate yâpayati dharmam ka desayati. This is evidently
an idiomatic phrase, for it occurs again and again in the Nepalese text of
the Sukhavatîvyûha {MS. 26 b, 1. 1. 2 j 55 a, 1. 2, etc.}. It seems to mean,
he stands there, hold::; himself, supports himself, and teaches the law.
Burnouf translates tile same phraf;e by, "ils se tronvent, vivent existent'-
(Lotlls, p. 354.). On yâpeti in Pâli, see Fausböll, Dasaratha-jâtaka, pp. 26,
28 j and yâpana in Sanskrit.
2 Kiñkinîgâla. The texts read kañkanagalais ka and kañkanîgalais ka,
and again later kaÙkanîgalunâm {also lû} and kañkanîgalânâm. 1\1r.
Beal translates from Chinese "seven rows of exquisite curtains," and
again "gemmous curtains." First of all, it seems clear that we must read
gâla, net, web, instead of gala. Secondly, kaúkana, bracelet, gives no
sense, for what could be the meaning of nets or string of bracelets? I
prefer to read kiiIkinîgåla, nets or strings or rows of bells. Such rows of
bells served for ornamenting- a garden, and it may be said of them that, if
moved by the wind, they gi,
e forth certain sounds. In the commentary
on Dhammapada 30, p. 1!H, we meet with kiúkinikagåla, from which like-
wise the music proceeds j see Childers, s. v. gåla. In the 1\[8S. of the
Nepalese 8ukhayatîvyflha {R. A. S.}, p. 3!) a, 1. 4, I likewise find svarna-
ratnakiñ.kinîgålâni, which settles the matter, and shòws how little confi-
dence we can place in the Japanese texts.
8 Anuparikshipta, inclosed; see parikkhepo in Chilllers' Diet.

224 ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN.

gems, viz. gold, silver, beryl, and crystal. 1 'Vith
such arrays of excellences peculiar to a BudJha-
country is that Buddha-country aJoru(Jd.
And again, 0 ;8âl'ipntra, in that ,vorlcl Sukhavatî
there are lotus lakes, adorned \vith the seven gellls,
viz. gold, silver, beryl, crystal, red pearls, diamonds,

"'1 The four and seven precious things in Pâli are (according to Child-
ers: -

1. suvannam, gold.
2. ragutam, silver.
3. muttâ, pearls.
4. mani, gems (as sapphire, ruby).
5. veluriyam, eat's eye.
6. vayiram, diamond.
7. pavâlam, coral.
Here Childers translates eat's eJTe; but s. v. vcluriyam, he says, a pre-
cious stone, perhaps lapis lazuli.
In Sanskrit (TIumouf, Lotus, p. 320):-
1.- suyama, gold.
2. rûpya, sih.er.
3. vaidùrya, lapis lazuli.
4. sphatika, crystal.
5. lohitamllkti, red pearls.
6. a.Ci'J}wgarùha, diamond.
7. musftragalya, coral.
Julien (Pèlet'ins Buddltistes, vol. ii. p. 482) gÏ\.cs the following list:-
1. sphatika, rock crysta1.
2. vaidûrya, lapis lazuli.
3. asmagarbha, cornaline.
4. musâragalva, amber.
5. padmarâga, ruby.
Vairlûrya (orVaidflrya) is mentioned in the Tath:îgatagunagnânakintya_
vishayftvatftranirdesa pVassilief, p. 161) as a preciolls stone which, if
placed on green cloth, looks green, if placed on red cloth, red. The fact
that vaidûrya is often compared with the color of the eyes of a cat would
!:'eem to point to the eat's eye (see Borooah's En!Jl. Sans!,,/'it Dictimul1.y,
vol. ii. preface, p. ix.), certaillly not tó lapis lazuli. Cat's eye is a killd of
chalcedony. I see, however, that vaiclûrya has been recognized as the
original of the Greek ßÝJpvMo'i, a very ingenious conjecture, either of
'Veber's or of !>ott's, considering' that lingual d has a sound akin to r, awl
ry may be changed to ly and 11 ("Teber, Omina, p. 326). The Persian
biIIaur or ballÜr, which Skeat gives as the etymon of ßÝJpvÀÀO'i, is of Arabic
origin, means crystal, anù could harùly have founù its way into Greek at
so early a tJlne.

ON SANSI\I:IT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN. 225

and corals as the seventh. They are full of ,vater
,vhieh possesses the eight good qualities,l their ,vaters
rise as high as the fords and bathing-places, so that
even cro,vs 2 may drink there; they are fun of golden
sand, and of vast extent. And in these lotus lakes
there are all around on the four sides four stairs,
beautiful and brilliant ,vith the four genIs, viz. gold,
silver, beryl, crystal. And on every side of these lo-
tus lakes gen1 trees are growing, beautiful and bril
liant ,vith the seven genls, viz. gold, silver, beryl,
crystal, red pearls, dianlonds, and corals as the
seventh. And in those lotus lakes lotus flo\vers are
gro,ving, blue, blue-colored, of blue splenùor, blue to

1 The eight good qualities of water are limpidity and purity, refreshing
coolness, sweetne
s, softnesi':, fertilizing qualities, calmness, power of pre-
venting famine, productiveness. See ileal, Catena, p. 37!).
2 Kâkâpeya. One teXt reads Kâkapeya, the other Kâkâpeya. It is
dit1ïcult to choose. The more usual word is kâkapeya, which is explained
by l)ânini, ii. 1, 33. It is uncertain, howeyer, whether kß.kapeya is meant
as a laudatory or as a dppreciatory tenn. Boehtlingk takes it in the latter
sense,
U1d translates nadî kâkapeyâ, by a shallow river that could be
drunk up by a crow. Târânâtha takes it in the former sense, and trans-
lates nadî krtkapeyâ, as a river so full of water that a crow can drink it
without bending its neck (kâkair anatakandharaih pîyate; pûrnodaka-
tvena prasasye kâkaih peye nadyâùau). In our passage kâkapeya must be
a term of praise, and we therefore could only render it by
'ponds so full
of water that crows could drink from them." nut why should so well
known a word as kâkapeya have been spelt kâkâpeya, unless it was done
intentionally? And if intentionally, what was it intended for ( 'Ve must
remember that Pânini, Íi. 1, 42 scho1., teaches us how to form the word
tîrthakâka, a crow at a 6rtha, which means a person in a wrong place.
It would seem, therefore, that crows were considered out of place at a tîr-
tha or bathing-place, either because they were "birds of ill omen, or because
they defiled the water. From that point of view, kâkâpeya would mean
a pond not yisited by crows, free from crows.- Professor ptschel has
('alled my attention to
1ahâparinibbâna Sutta (J. R. A. S. 1875, p. 67, p.
21), where kâkapeyâ clearly refers to a full river. 'Samati
p.lika, if this is
the right reading, occurs in tIle same place as an epithet of a river, by the
side of kâkapeya, and I think it mo
t likely that it means rising to a level
with the tirthas, the fords or bathing-places. 1\1r. Rhys Davids informs
me that the commentary explains the two words by samatittikft ti sama-
haritâ, kâkapeyyâ ti yatthatatthaki tîre tltitena kftkena sakkâ patum tie
YOLo Y. 15

226 ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN.

behold; yello\v, yello\v-colored, of yellow splendor,
yellow to behold; red, red-colored, of red splendor,
red to behold; ,vbite, ,vhite-colored, of ,vhite splen-
dor, white to behold; beautiful, beautifully-colored,
of beautiful splendor, beautiful to behold, and in cir-
cumference as large as the ,vheel of a chariot.
And again, 0 Sâriputra, in that Buddha-country
there are heavenly n1usical instrunlents ahvays played
on and the earth is lovely and of golden color. And
in that Buddha.-country a flower-rain of heavenly
l\l
lldârava blossoms pours down three tilnes every
day, and three tilnes every night. And the beings
who are born there worship before their morning
meal! a hundred thousand !(ofis of Bl1dllhas by go-
ing to other worlds; and having showered a hundred
thousand of ICotis of flowers upon each Tathâgata,
they return to their own world in tillle for the after-
noon rest. 2 'Vith such arrays of excellences peculiar
to a Buddha-country is that Blll1dha-country adorned.
And again, 0 Sâriputra, there are in that Buddha-
country s,vans, curlews,3 and peacocks. Three tin1es
every night, and three tilnes every da.y, they COlne
together and perform a concert, each uttering his own
note. And froln them thus uttering proceeds a sound

1 Purobhaktena. The text is difficult to read, but it can hardly be
doubtful that purobhaktena corresponds to Pâli purebhattam (i. e. before
the morning meal), opposed to pakkhâbhattam, after the noonday mea]
(i. e. in the afternoon). See Childers, s. v. Púrvabhaktikâ would be the
first repast, as Professor Cowell informs me.
2 Di vâ vihârâya, for the noonday rest, the siesta. See Childers, s. v.
vihâra.
8 Krauñkâh. Snipe, curlew. Is it meant for Kuravîka, or Karavîka, a
fine-voiced bird (according to Kern, the Sk. karâyikâ), or for Ka]aviÚka-
Pâli Kalavîka? See Childers, s. v. opapâtiko; Burnouf, Lotus, p. 566. I
see, however, the same birds mentioned together elsewhere, as hamsak-
ramikamayûrasukas:1likakokila, etc. On mayûra see lUah:1v. Introd. p.
xxxix.; lh'. I. lU 1, 14.

O SAKSKRIT TEXTS DISCOYEI
ED I JAPAN. 227

proclainling the five virtues, the five powers, and the
seven steps leading towards the highest kno\vledge. 1
"\Vhen the lHen there hear that sound, renlenlbrance
of lluddha, renlenlbrance of the La.w, relnembrance
of the Assern bly, rises in their mind.
N O\V, do you think, 0 Sâriputra, that these are
beings who have entered into the nature of anilnals
(birds, etc.)? This is not to be thought of. The
very name of hells is unknown in that Buddha-coun-
try, and likewise that of (descent into) anilual nat-
ures and of the realnl of Yama (the fonr apâyas ).2
No, these tribes of birds have been nlade on purpose

1 IndriyabalabodhyaÎ1gasabda. These are technical terms, but their
meaning is not quite clear. Spence Hardy, in his .lIIanual, p. 4ü8, enu-
merates the fi\Te indrayas, viz. (1) sardhâwa, purity (probably sraddhâ,
faith), (2) wiraya, persevering exertion (vîrya), (3) sati or smirti, the as-
ccrtaimllent of truth (S1ll1.iti), (4) samâdhi, tranquillity, (5) pragnâwa, wis-
dom (praf./ûâ).
The fi\Te balayas (bala), he add!':, are the same as the five indrayas.
The seven bowdyânga (bodhyaÙga) are, according to him: (1) sihi or
smirti, the ascertainment of the truth ùy mental application, (2) dharmma-
wicha, the investigation of causes. (3) wîraya, persevering exertion, (4)
prîti, joy, (5) passadhi, or prasrabdhi, tranquillity, (6) samfulhi, tranquil-
lity in a higher degree, including freedom from all that disturbs either
body or mind, (7) upekshâ, equanimity.
It will be seen from this that some of these qualities or excellences oc-
cur both as indriyas and bodhyangas, while balas are throughout identical
with indriyas.
TIumouf, however, in his Lotus, gives a list of five balas (from the Vo-
c(
bulaÏ1.e Penta[jlotte) which correspond with the five indriyas of Spence
Hardy: viz. sraddhâ-bala, power of faith, vîrya-bala, power of vigor,
smriti-bala, power of memory, samâdhi-bala, power of meditation, pra,qilâ-
bala, power of knowledge. They precede the seven bodhyaÍIgas both in
the Lotus, the V ocabulait'e PentaglQtte, and the Lalita-Vistara.
To these seven bodhyangas Burnouf has assigned a special treatise (Ap-
pendix xii. p. 7Ü6). They occur both ill Sanskrit and Pâli.
2 Niraya, the hells, al!'o called N araka. Yamaloka, the realm of Yama,
the judge of the dead, is explained as the four Apâyas-i. e. Naraka,
hell, Tiryagyoni, birth as animals, Pretaloka, realm of the dead, Asura-
Ioka, realm of evil spirits. The three terms which are here used together
occur likewise in a passage translated by Burnouf, Introduction, p. 544.

228 ON SANSKnIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN.

by the Tathâgata Anlit
yus, and tbey utter the sound
of the Law. \Vith such arrays of excellences.. etc.
And again, 0 Sâriputra, ,vhell those rows of pahn-
trees and strings of bells in that Buddha-country are
1110ved by the ,vind, a s\veet and enrapturing sound
proceeds from thein. Yes, 0 Sftriputra., as from a
heavenly 11lusical instrull1ent consisting of a hundred
thousand J{:otis of sounds, ,vhen played by Âryas, a
s\veet and enrapturing sound proceeds, a sweet and
enrapturing sound proceeds frolH tbose rows of pahn-
trees and strings of bells 1110ved by the wind. And
,vhen the men hear that sound, reflection on Buddba
arises in their body, reflection on the Lavv, reflection
on the Assembly. 'Vith such arrays of excellences,
etc.
Now ,vhat do you tl1ink, 0 Sâriputra, for what
reason is tlw,t Tathâgata called An1Ítâyus? The
length of life (âyns), 0 A
û,riputra, of that Tathâgata
and of those men there is inuneasnrable (an1Ïta).
'rherefore is that Tathâgata called Anlitâyns. And
ten J{alpas have passed, 0 Sâriputra, since that Ta-
tbâgata awoke to perfect kno,vledge.
And ,vhat do you think, 0 Sâriputra, for what
reason is that Tathâgata called An1itâbhâs? The
splendor (âbbâs), 0 Sâriputra, of that 1\tthâgata is
unimpeded over all Buddha-countries. Therefore is
that Tathâgata called All1itâbhâs.
And there is, 0 Sâripntra, an innul11Qrable assem-
11y of disciples ,vith that l"athtLgata, purified and
venerable persons, whose number it is not easy to
count. 'Vith such arrays of excellences, etc.
And again, 0 Sâri putra, of those beings also who
are born in the nuddha-conntry of the Tathfi.gata
Amitâyus as purified Dodhisattvas, never to return

O:N SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN. 2
9

again and bound by one birth only, of those Dodhi-
sattvas also, 0 Sâriplltra, the number is not easy to
count, except they are reckoned as infinite in llUll1-
ber. t
Then again all beings, 0 Sâriputra, ought to Inake
fervent prayer for that Budùha-coulltry. .And \vhy ?
necause they COlne together there ,vith such excpllent
1nen. Beings are not born in that Buddha-country of
the Tathâgata All1Ïtâyus as a reward and result of
gooù ,yorks perfornled in this present life. 2 No, what-
ever son or daughter of a fan1Ïly shall hear the IUtll1e
of the blessed .A.nlitâyus, the 1\tthâgata, aud having
heard it, shall keep it in n1Ïnd, and \vith thoughts
undisturbed shall keep it in 11linJ for one, two, three,
four, five, six, or seven nights, that son or daughter
of a fan1ily, \vhen he or she COllles to die, then that
Alnitâyus, the Tathâgata, surrounded by an assembly
of disci pIes anù followeù by a host of DOllhisattvas,
'will stanJ before theln at their hour of dpath, and
they will depart this life \vith tranquil n1Ïnds. After
their death they \vill be born in the ,vodd Sukhavatî
1 Hi
ankhyâm gakkhanti, they are called; cf. Childers, s. v. sankhyâ.
Asankhyeya, even more than aprameya, is the recognized term for infin-
ity. Burnouf, Lotus, p. 832.
2 Avaramâtraka. This is the Pâlì oramattako, "belong-ing merely to
the present life," and tho intention of the writer seems to be to inculcate
the doctrine of the Mahâyâna, that f;alvation can be obtained by mere rep-
etitions of the name of AmitftLha, in direct opposition. to the orig-inal doc-
trine of Buddha, that as a man so\\ eth, so he reapeth. Buddha would
have taught that the klV
alamûla, the root or the f;to
k of good works per-
formed in this world (a\ramm:ltraka), will bear fruit in the next, while
here" vain repetitions" seems all that is enjoined. The Chinese translators
take a different view of this passage, and [ am not myself quite certain that
I have understood it rightly. But from the OIHI of this section, where we
read kulapntrena vâ kuladuhitrã vâ tatra buddhakshetre kittapr:lnidhftnam
kartavyam, it seems clear that the locative (bmhlhakshetre) forms the ob-
ject of the pmnidhâna, the fervent prayer or longing. The Satpurushas
already in the lluddhakshetra would be the innumerable men (manushyâ::;)
and Boddhisattvas mentioned before.

230 ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN.

in the Buddha-country of the sanle Anlitftyus, the
'Tathâgata. Therefore, then, 0 Ò'âriputra, having
perceived this cause and effect, 1 I with reverence say
thus, Every son and every daughter of a fan1Ïly ought
to nlake with their whole mind fervent prayer for that
Buddha-country.
And now, 0 Sâriputra as I here at present glorify
that world, thus in the East, 0 Sâriputra, other
blessed Buddhas, led by the Tathâgata Akshobhya,
the 'Tathâgata l\Ierudhvaga, the Tathftgata 1\Iahâ-
meru, the Tathâgata l\Ieruprabhâsa, and the Tathâ-
gat a l\Iañgudhvaga, equal in nUlnber to the sand of
the river Ganga, conlprehend their o\vn Buddha-coun-
tries ill their speech, and then reveal thenl. 2 Accept
this repetition of the Law, called the "Favor of all
Buddhas," \vhich Inagnifies their inconceivable excel-
lences.
Thus also in the South, do other blessed Buddhas,
led by the Tathfigata Ilandrasûryaprad
pa, the Ta-
th
gata Yasa7tprabha, the Tathâgata l\lahârkiskandha,
the Tathâgata l\lerllpradîpa, the Tathâgata Ananta-
vîrya, equal in nun1 bel' to the sand of the river Gangâ,
comprehend their own Buddha-countries in their
speech, and then reveal theine Accept, etc. .
Thus also in the "Vest do other blessed Buddhas,
led by the Tathâgata An1Ïtâyus, the Tathâgata AnlÏ-

1 Arthavasa, lit. the power of the thing; if. Dhammapada, p. 388, v.
28!).
2 I am not quite certain as to the meaning of this passage, but if we
enter into the bold metaphor of the text, viz., that the Buddhas cover
the Buddha-countries with the organ of their tongue and then unroll it,
.. what is intended can hardly be anything but that they first try to find
words for the excellences of those countries, and then reveal or proclaim
them. Burnouf, however (Lotus, p.-417), takes the expression in a literal
sense, though he is shocked by its grotesqueness. On these nuddhas and
their countries, see Bumouf, Lotus, p. 113.

ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN. 231

taskandha, the Tathftgata All1Ïtadbvaga, the Tathâgata
l\lahâprabha, the Tathâgata 1\Iahâratl1aketu, the Ta-
thagata Suddharas1l1iprabha, equal in number to the
sand of the river Gangâ, cOlllprehend, etc.
Thus also in the North do other blessed Buddhas,
led by the 'Tathâgata l\Iah
rkiskandha, the Tathâgata
V aisv
naranirghosha, the Tathftgata Dundubhisvara-
nirghosha, the l."athB,gata Dushpradbarsha, the Tathâ-
gata Âdityasambhava, the Tat11
gata Galeniprabha
(Gvalanaprabha ?), tbe Tathâgata Prabhâkara, equal
in nUll1ber to the sand, etc.
Tb us also.in the Nadir do other blessed Buddhas,
led by the Tath
gata Simha, the Tathâgata Yasas, the
Tathftgata Yasaltprabhâva, the Tatllfìgata Dharma,
the Tathâgata Dharmadhara, the Ta.th
gata Dhar-
nladhvaga, equal in nUll1ber to the sand, etc.
Thus also in the Zenith do other blessed Buddhas,
led by the Tathftgata Drabrnaghosha, the Tathâgata
N akshatrarftga, tbe Tath
gata Indraketudhvagarftga,
the Tatllftgata Gandhotb.t1l1a, the Tathâgata Gan-
dhaprabh
sa, the Tathâgata l\labârkiskandha, the
Tathâgata Ratllakusulnasall1pnshpitagâtra, the Ta-
th
gata Sâlendrarâga, the Tatbâgata Ratnotpalasri,
the Tatbâgata Sarvâdarsa, the Tathiì.gata Sume-
rllkalpa, equal in nU111ber to the sand, etc. 1
No\v what do yon think, 0 Sâriputra, for what
reason is tbat repetition of the La\v called the Favor
of all Buddhas? Every son or daughter of a falnily
,vho shall hear the nall1e of that repetition of the La,v
and retain in their memory the nall1eS of those blessed
Buddhas, will all be favored by the Buddhas, and

1 It shouhl be remarked that the Tathâgatas here assigned to the ten
quarters differ entirely from those as
igned to them in the Lalita-vistara,
book xx. Not even AmitâLha is mentioned there.

232 ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN.

,,,ill never return again, being once in possession of
the transcendent true knowledge. Therefore, then,
o Sâriputra, believe,I accept, and long for me and
those blessed B llddhas !
"\Vhatever sons or daughters of a fan1ily shall make
Inental prayer for the BlldJha-country of that blessed
An1itâyus, the Tathâgata, or are Inakillg it now or
have lnade it forn1erly, all these ,vill never return
again, being once in possession of the transcendent
trne kno,vledge. They ,viII be born in that Buddha-
conntry, have been born, or are being born no,v.
Therefore, then, 0 Sâriputra, 111ental prayer is to be
made for that Buddha-country by faithful sons and
daughters of a falnily.
And as I at present 111agnify here the inconceivable
excellences of those blessed Buddhas, thus, 0 Sâri-
putra, do those blessed Buddhas magnify lny o,vn
inconceivable excellences.
A very difficult work has been clone by Sâkyamuni,
the sovereign of the Sftkyas. I-Iaving obtained the
transcendent true kno,vledge in this ,vorld Saha, he
taught the Law which all the world is reluctant to
accept, during this corruption of the present J{alpa,
during this corruption of lnankind, during this cor-
}'uption of belief, during this corruption of life, dur-
ing this corruption of passions.
1 Pratîyatha. The texts give again alld again pattîyatha, evidentJy the
Pft1i form, instead of pratî.rata. I have Jeft t h a, the Pftli terminatioll of
the 2 p. pI. in the imperative, illstead of t a, because that form was clearly
JIltended, while p a for p r a may be an accident. Yet I ha\.e littJe douht
that patîyatha was in the original text. That it is meant for the impera-
tÌ\Te, we see fmm sraddadhâdlnTam, .etc., farther on. Other traces of the
influence of P:lli or Prakrit on the Sanskrit of our SÚtra appear in arhan-
!f:aih, the various reading for arhadùhih, which I preferred; sambahula for
bahula; dhriyate yâpayati; purobhaktena; anyatra; saÍ1 khyfuu gaH:ltanti;
avaramâtraka; vetlwna instead of vcshtana, in nirvetliana; dharma-
paryâya (Corj). InscrÍJ}t. plate xv.), etc.

ON SA
SKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN. 233

This is even for nle, 0 Sâriputra, an extrelnely
difficult work that, having obtained the transcendent
true knowledge in this ,vodd Saha, I taught the Law
.which all tbe ,vorld is reluctant to accept, during this
corruption of mankind, of belief, of passion, of life,
. and of this present I(alpa.
Thus spoke Dbagavat joyful in his 1111ud. And the
honorable SB.ripntra, and the TIhikshus and Dodhi-
sattvas, and the \vhole \vorld \vith the gods, luén, evil
spirits, and genii, applauded the speech of Bhagavat. 1
This is the
lahttyftnasûtra
caned Sukhavatîvyûha.

1 The Sukhavatîvyí1ha, even in its shortest text, is called a Mahftyâna-
sûtra, nor is there any reason wby a l\Iahâ,yâna-slltra shuuld not be short.
The meaning of Mahâyttna-sûtra is simply a SÜtra belonging to the 1\la-
llâyâna school, the school of the Great Boat. It was Durnouf who, in his
lntj.odnction to the History of Buddhism, tried very hard to establish a dis-
tinction between the Vaipulya or de\'eloped Sûtras, and what he calls the
simple Sûtras. Now, the Vaipulya Sûtras may all belong to the l\Iahãyân3
school, but that would not prove that all the Sûtras of the Mahâyâna school
are Vaipulya or developed Sûtras. The name of simple Sûtra, in opposi-
tion to the Vaipulya or developed Sûtras, is 110t recognized by the Bud-
dhists themselves; it is reaUy an invention of Hurnouf's. No doubt there
is a great difference between a Vaipulya Sûtra, such a:-; the Lotus of the
Good Law, translated by Bumouf, and the Sûtras which Burnouf trans-
lated from the Divyâ\
adâna. But what Burnouf considers as the distin-
guishing mark of a Vaipulya Sûtra, viz. the occurrence of Bodhi
attvas,
as followers of the Buddha Sâkyamuni, would no longer seem to be ten-
able,. unless we classed our short Sukhavatî-vyûha as a Vaipulya or de-
yt'loped Sûtra. :For this there is no authority. Our Sûtra is called a
1\lahiì.yâna Sûtra, never a Vaipulya Sfltra, and yet among' the followers of
Buddha, the Bodhisattvas constitute a very considerable portion. nut
more than that, Amitâbha, the Buddha of Sul.havatî, allother personage
whom Durnouf looks upon as peculiar to the Vaipulya Sûtras, who i
, in
fact, one of the Dhyâni-buddhas, though not called by that name in our
Sûtra, forms the chief object. of its teaching, and is represented as coeval
with Buddha S-âkyamuni.t The larger text of the Silkbavath'yûha would
:11= "Les présence des ßodhisattvas ou leur abf'ence intéresse done Ie fonds rnêmo
des livres où on la remarque, et il est ùien éviùcut que ce f'cul point trace une ligna
de ùémarcation profonùc entre les SíHras orùinaires et les Slltras dévcloppés:'
13urnouf. Introduction, p. 112.
t "L:iùéc Ù'Ull ou ùe plu
ieurs Buddhas surhumains, ceUe I{e llodhisattvas créés
par eux, sont dps conceptions au
si étrangères á ces livres (le. Sûtms simple
) que
celle Ù.Ull Adibuùùha ou d'un Dieu.'. - Burnouf, IntrodurtiQll, p. 120.

234 ON SA
SKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN.

This Sûtra sounds to us, no doubt, very different
fronl the original teaching of Bndùha. And so it is.
Nevertheless it is the nlost popular and 1110St widely
read Sûtra in Japan, and the whole religion of the
great n1ass of the people may be said to be founded
on it. "Repeat the name of An1Ïtâbha as often as
you can, repeat it particular! y in the hour of death, ,
and you ,vill go straight to Sukhavatî and be happy
forever;" this is what Japanese Buddhists are asked
to believe: this is what they are told ,vas the teach-
ing of Buddha. There is one passage in our Sûtra
,vhich seems even to be pointedly directed against the
original teaching of Buddha. Buddha taught that as
a nlan soweth so shall he reap, and that by a stock of
good ,yorks accunullated on earth the way is opened
to higher kno\vledge and higher bliss. Our Sûtl'a
says No; not by good works done on eart11, but by
a Inere repetition of the nan1e of An1Ïtâbha is an
pntrance gained into the land of bliss. This is no
hetter than what later Brahmanislu teaches, viz.
H llepeat the name of Hari or of J{rishna, and you
,,,ill be saved." It is no better than \vhat e\'en some
Christian teachers are reported to teach. It Inay be
that in a lower stage of civilization even such teach-
ing has produced sonle kind of good.! But J-apan is
surely ripe for better things. What the worship of
Amitftbha may lead to we can learn fron1 a descrip-
tion given by Dr. Edkins in his "Trip to Ning-po
and T'hëen-t'hae. "The next thing," be ,vrites,
" sho\vn to llS was the prison, in wbich about a dozen

certainly, according to Burnouf's definition, seem to faIl into the category
of the Vilipulya Sûtras. But it is not so called in the 1\ISS. which I have
seen, and Burnouf himself gives an analysis of that Sf1tra (Int?'oduction,
p. ÐÐ) as a specimen of a l\Iahâyâna, but not of a Vaipulya Sûtra.
1 See II. Yule, lJfarco Polo, 2d ed. vol. i. pp. 441-443.

O SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN. 235

priests Lad allo,ved thenlSelves to be shut up for a
nunlber of months or years, during which they ,vere
to occupy thenlselves in repeating the nalne of Amida
Buddha,1 day and night, without illterluission. Dur-
ing the day the ,vhole number 'were to be thus en-
gaged; and during the night they took it by turns,
and divided thenlselves into watches, so as to insure
the keeping up of the work till 1110rlling. 'Ve asked
,vhen they ,vere to be let out. To ,vhich it was re-
plied, that they n1Ïght be libera.ted at their own re-
quest, but not before they had spent several n1011ths
in seclusion. We inquired. what could be the use of
such an endless repetition of. the nall1e of Buddha.
To which it was answered, that the constant repeti-
tion of the sacred l1an1e had a tendency to purify the
heart, to deaden the affections towards the present
world, and to prepare them for the state of Nirvâna.
It ,vas further asked whether Buddha was likely to
be pleased with such an endless repetition of his
n:une. To which it was answered, tbat in the West-
e

n world it was considered a mark of respect to re-
peat tbe nan1e of anyone WhOlll we delighted to
honor. The recluses seen1ed most of then1 young
lllen; SOl1le of whom caIne out to the bars of their
cage to look at the strangers, but kept on repeating
the name of Buddha as they stood there. It appeared
to us that nothing was more calculated to produce
idiocy than such a perpetual repetition of a single
na1He, and tbe stupid appearance of Inany of the
priests whom ,ve have seen seems to have been in-
duced by SOlne such process." -r

1 In China, as Dr. Edkins state
, the doctrine of Amitâbha is represented
by the
o-called Lotus school (Lian-tsung) or Pure Land (T
ing-tu). The
founder of this school in China was Hwci-yuan of the T
in dynasty (fourth
century). The seconù patriarch (tsu) of this school was Kwallg-ming
(seyenth century).

236 ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN.

Is it not high tilne tllat tIle millions ,vho live in
Japan, and profess a faith in Buddha, should be told
that this doctrine of AUlitâbha and all tbe l\laltâyâna
doctrine is a secondary forlll of I3uddhisl11, a corrup-
tion of the pure doctrine of the Royal Prince, and
that if they really lllean to be Buddhists, they should
return to the words of Buddha, as they are preserved
to us in the old Sûtras? Instead of depending, as
they now do, on Chinese translations, not always ac-
curate, of degraded and degrading 1\lah
yâna tracts,
why should they not have Japanese translations of
the best portions of Buddha's real doctrine, which
would elevate their character, and give thell1 a relig-
ion of ,vhich they need not be ashamed? There are
Chinese translations of SOllie of the better portions
of the Sacred \Vritings of Buddhisnl. They exist in
Japan too, as nlay be seen in that nlagnificent collec-
tion of the Buddhist Tripitaka which was sent frolll
Japan as a present to the English Governlnen t, and
of ,vhich 1\1r. Beal has given us a very useful Cata-
logue. TIut they al.e evidently far less considered in
Japan than the silly and the n1Íschievous stories of
Alnitftbha and his Paradise, and those which I kno,v
fronl translations are far frOIl1 correct.
I hope that 1\1r. Bl1nyill Nanjio and 1\1:r. l{asawara,
if they diligently continue their study of Sanskrit
and Pâ1i, \vill be able to do a really great and good
,york, after their return to Japan. And if Inore
yuung Buddhist priests are cOllling over, I shaH al-
\vays, so far as IllY other occupations allo,v it, be
glad to teach them, and to help thenl in their un-
selfish work. There is a great future in store, I
believe, for those Eastern Islands, which have been
called prophetically "the England of the East," and

ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED I JAPAN. 237

to purify and ref o rIll their religion - that is, to bring
it back to its original form - is a ,york that lllUSt be
done before anything else can be atteIl1pted.
In return, I hope that they and their friends in
Japan, and ill Corea and China too, will do all they
can to discover, if possible, some more of the ancient
Sanskrit texts, and send them over to us. A begin-
ning, at all events, bas been made, and if the meln-
bers of this Society who have friends in China or
in Japan \vill help, if H. E. the Japanese l\iillister,
l\lori Arinori, who bas bonored us by his presence to-
day, will lend us his powerful assistance, I have little
doubt that tbe dreaul which passed before the mind
of your late President may still becol11e a reality, and
that SOUle of the 1\fSS. ,vhich, beginning with the be-
ginning of our era, ,vere carrieù fron1 India to China,
Corea, and Japan, Inay return to us,
hether in the
original or in copies, like the one sent to 111e by
Ir.
Shuntai Ishika\va.
"\Vith the help of such MSS. we shan be able all
the better to sbow to those devoted students who
from tbe extreme East have come to the extrenle
West in order to learn to read their sacred writings
In the original Sanskrit or Pftli, \vhat difference there
is between the simple teaching of Buddha and the
later developnlents and corruptions of Buddhisln.
Buddha hinlself, I feel convinced, never knew even
the names of Anlitâbha, A valokitesvara, or Sukhavatî.
Then, how can a nation call itself Buddhist whos re-
ligion consists chiefly in a belief in a divine Amitâbha
and his son A valokitesvara, and in a hope of eternal
life in the paradise of Sukhavatî?

238 ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN.

POSTSCRIPT: Oxford, March 10, 1880.
The hope which I expressed in my paper on " San-
skrit Texts discoyered in Japan," viz. that other San-
skrit t
xts n1ight still COlne to light in Japan or China,
has been fulfilled sooner than I expected. l\:fr. A
Wylie wrote to me on March 3 that he had brought
a number of Sanskrit-Chinese books from Japan, and
he afterwards kindly sent them to me to exau1ine.
They were of the same appearance and character as
the dictionary which Dr. Edkins had lent nle, and
the Sukhavatî-vyûha which I had received froln ,Ja-
pan. But with the exception of a collection of invo-
cations, called the Vagra-sûtra, an.d the short Pragñ
-
hridaya-sûtra, they contained no continuous texts.
The books were intended to teach the Sanskrit alpha-
bet, and every possible and impossible con1bination
of the Devanfìgarî letters, and that was all. Still, so
large a nUln ber of books written to teach the Sanskrit
al phabet augurs well for the existence of Sanskrit
texts. There was among 1\11'. "\V ylie's books a second
Chinese-Sanskrit-Japanese vocabulary, of ,vhich 1\11'.
!Casa,vara has given me the follo,ving account: " This
vocabulary is called 'A Thousand Sanskrit and Chi-
nese \V ords,' and it is said to have been arranged by
I-tsing, who left China for India in 671, about twen-
ty-seven yeal's after Hiouen-thsang's return to China,
and who is best known as the author of a book called
N anbae-ki-kwei-kou'en, on the manners and customs
of the Indian Buddhists at that tilne.
" This vocabulary ,vas brought from China to Ja-
pan by Zikaku, a J apal1ese priest, who ,vent to China
in 838 and returned in 847. It is Rtated at the end
of the book, t1lat in the year 884 a Japanese priest of

ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOYERED IN JAPAN. 239

the name of Rioyiu copied that vocabulary from a
text belonging to another priest, Yûìkai. The edi-
tion brought from Japan by l\lr. Wylie was published
there in the year 1727 by a priest called J akumio."
The follo\ving curious passage occurs in the preface
of Jakulllio's edition: "This vocabulary is generally
called ' One Thousand Sanskrit and Chinese Words.'
It is stated in A
nen's work, that this was first
brought (from China) by Zikaku. I have corrected
severalll1istakes in this vocabulary, comparing many
copies; yet the present edition is not free fron1 blun-
del's; I hope the readers \vill correct them, if they
have better copies.
"In the telnple HBriuji, in Yamato, there are
d P -^ ^ . ^ l . d ^ d S
treasure ragllaparalnIta 1rz ayasutraln, an on-
shio-dhftrani, written on t\VO palm leaves, handed
down from Central India; and, at the end of these,
fourteen letters of the 'siddha' are written. In the
present edition of the vocabulary the alphabet is in
ilnitation of that of the palm leaves, except such
forms of letters as cannot be distingtlÏshed from those
prevalent an10ng the scriveners at the present day.
" H6riuji is one of eleven telnples founded by the
prince Ulnayado (\vho died A. D. 621). This tem-
ple is at a town named Tatsuta, in the province Ya-
lllato, near I{ioto, the western capital."
Here, then, we have clear evidence that in the
year 1727 palIn leaves containing the text of San-
skrit Sûtras were still preserved in the tenlp]e of
HBriuji. If that temple is still in existence, lllight
not SOllie Buddhist priest of I{ioto, tIle \vestern capi-
tal of Japan, be induced to go there to see ,yhether
the paln1 leaves are still there, and, if they are, to
make a copy and send it to Oxford? F. 1\1. 1\1.

240 O SA
SKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN.

SECOND POSTSCRIPT: Oxford, AU[Ju,st 2, 1880.
At the end of ll1Y paper on "Sanskrit Texts in
Japan" I ulentioned ill a postscript (illarch 10) that
I bad received froll1
lr. \Vylie a copy of a yocabula.ry
called "A Thousand Sanskrit and Chinese "r ol'ds,"
conlpiled by I-tsing, about 700 A. D., and brought to
Japan by Zikaku, a Japanese priest, in 8-1:7 A. D.
TIJe edition of this vocabulary ,vhich
lr. Wylie
bought in Japan ,vas published by J akumio in 1727,
and in the preface the editor says: "In the teuJple
Hôriuji, in Yanlato, there are treasured Pragñâpâra-
nlitâhridaya-sûtralll and Sonshio-dhG,ranî, written
on t,vo palin leaves, handed down. frOll1 Central
India. "
l-Iôriuji is one of eleven tell1ples founded by Prince
U mayado, who died in A. D. 621. This teln pIe is in
a to,vn nalned Tatsuta, in the province Yall1ato, near
I{ioto, tbe western capital. I ended tHY article with
the foIIo,ving sentence: "IIere, then, we ha.ve clear
evidence that in the year 1727 palIn leaves containing
the text of Sanskrit S ûtras \vere still preserved. in
the tenlple of IIÛriuji. If that teIl1ple is still in ex-
istence, might not SOUle Buddhist priest of I(ioto, the
,vesteru capital of Japan, be induced to go there to
see ,vhether the palIn leaves are still there, and, if
they are, to Blake a copy and sel1ù it to Oxford? "
Sooner than expected this ,vish of lnine has been
fulfilled. On April 28 1\11'. Shigefuyu I{llrihal'a, of
I{ioto, a friend of one of Iny Sanskrit pnpils, 1\11'.
Bunyiu Nanjio, ,vho for SOllle years had hiulse1f taken
an interest in Sanskrit, ,vent to the tenlple or Inonas-
tery of I-IÛriuji to inquire ,vhether any old Sanskrit
1\188. \vere still preserved there. IIe was told tha.t

ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN. 241

the priests of the n10nastery had recently surrendered
their valuables to the Imperial Govern
1ent, and that
the ancient palm leaves had been presented to the
emperor.
In a chronicle kept at the monastery of H6riuji it
is stated that these palm leaves and other valuables
,vere brought by Ono Imoko, a retainer of the lVlik-
ado (the Empress Suiko), from China (during the
Sui dynasty, 589-618) to Japan, in the thirty-seventh
year of the age of Prince Un1ayado - i. e., A. D. 609.
The other valuable articles were:
1. N i 8, i. e., a cymbal used in Duddhist temples;
2. Mid z u - g a m e, a ,vater vessel;
3. S h a k u - j i 0, a staff, the top of which is armed
with metal rings, as carried by Buddhist
priests ;
4. K e s a (I{ ash â y a), a scarf, worn by Buddhist
priests across the shoulder, which belongell to
the falnous ßoùhidharlna ;
5. H ak i, a bo,vl, given by the saIne Bodhidhar-
Ina.
These things and the Sanskrit l\I8S. are said to
have belonged to SOUle Chinese priests, IHtllled II,vui-
sz' (Yeshi) and Nien-shan (N enzen), anù to four
others successively, ,vho lived in a monastery on the
n10untain called Nan-yo (Nangak), in the province of
Hãng (I{:6) in China. rrhese palnl-leaf 1\188. 111ay,
therefore, be supposed to date fron1 at least the sixth
century A. D., and be, in fact, the oldest Sanskrit .JISS.
now in e:ristence. l
l\Iay we not hope that fIis Excellency l\fori Ari-
nori, who expressed so warn1 an interest in this mat-
I See page 191.
VOL. "\. ItJ

242 ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAr AN.

ter when he was present at tbe lneeting of the Royal
Asiatic Society, \vill now lend us his po\verful aid,
and request the l\linister of the Deparbnent of tbe
Ilnpèrial Household to allow these 1\iSS. to be care.
fully copied or photographed?

INDEX.

. -+-

ACADEMIC freedom not without
dangers, 39.
Adams, II. C., quoted, 25.
Alphabet, phonetic, taLle of, 150;
reading according to, 151 sq.
Amyot, quoted, 13l.
Analogies, false, in comparative
theology, 98 sq.
Anaxagoras, quoted, 56.
Anglo-Saxon names for the days
of the week, 118.
Apostles, The, read the Veda,
127.
Archbishops ha,-e no official po-
sition in English universities, 8.
Aristotle, disrespectful remarks
about, 38 ; quoted, 56.

BABYLONIAN system of dividing
gold and silver still found in
the English sovereign, 19; of
reckoning time found on the
dial-plates of onr clocks, 19.
Beveridge, Bishop, quoteù, 30.
Bochart, quoted, 98.
Brackett, A. C., quoted, 88.
Budha, day of, 12l.
- and Buddha, distinction be-
tween, 115, 119.
Buddha, a personal and historical
character, 122; names of his
disciples, 221 ; repetition of his
name meritorious, 235.
Buddhism, when recognizcd in
China, 191 sq.; Japan convert-

ed to, 213; and Scandinavian
mythology, connection between,
113 sq., 122.
BuMer, Dr., quoted, 208.
Burnouf, quoted, 112.

Cassius, Dio, quoted, 118.
Chinese translators of Sanskrit
texts, 189.
Christian religion, historical anù
individual, 62.
Cicero, quoted, 72.
Clement of Alexandria, quotcd J
58, 61.
Clodd, E., quoted, 84.
Coincidences between Jewish anù
Pagan religions, 98 sq.
Colbourne, Wm., quoted, 153.
Counting possible without lan-
guage, 67.

DAPHNE, meaning of, 82.
Davids Rh,ljs, quoted, 16.
Dictionaries, value of, 17.
Dogmatic teaching, evil of, 31.
Donar, 120.
Du Bois-Reymond, quoted, 9.
Duhitar, a Sanskrit word for
daughter, 17.
Dyaus, 121.

Edkins, Dr , quoted, 205.
Education, academic, 28; elemen-
tary, 23; scholastic, 24; in the
beginning purely dogmatic, 22 ;

244

compulsory, mark of a new era,
21; dangers of compulsory, 22..
Ellis, quoted, 111 sq.
Ellis, A. J. t quoted, 155 sq.
E11lpedokles, quoted, 56, 65.
English, society, intolerance of,
7.
- universities describcd, 10; too
little of academic freedom in,
40.
- names for the days of the
week, 118.
- written in hieroglypbics, 17 sq.
- spelling, a national misfortune,
22.
- present numLer of speaking,
138; future number of speak-
ing, 138.
Epicharmos, quoted, 55.
Esquimaux, tale among the, quot-
ed, 83 sq.
Esthonian tale, quoted, 86 sq.
Examinations, good, to be re-
warded by honor, 44; a means
to ascertain how pupils have
been taught, 43; strong feeling
against, 42 sq.

Fergusson, Jas., quoted, 113 sq.
Figures, our, received from the
Arabs, 20.
Forgeries in Sanskrit MSS., 109.
Freedom, address on, 1 sq.; of
thought, meaning of, 3.
Freethinkers, a title of honor, 6.
French, names for the days of the
week, 118; present number of
speaking, 137; future number of
speaking, 138.
Freyja, day of, 120.
Friday t 120.

GENUS and Species, meaning 01,
32 sq.

INDEX.

German names for the days of
the week, 119.
- .Middle-High, names for the
days of the week, 119.
- Old-High, names for the days
of the week, 119.
- present number of speaking,
138; future number of speak-
ing, 138.
- Universities, how much time
spent in lecturing in, 39.
Grammars, Latin and Greek, defi-
ciencies of, 26.
Greek and Roman classics not
read cnough, 25.
Greek philosophy, its develop-
ment chiefly due to the absel)('e
of an established religion anù
influential priesthood, 63; re-
ligion, national and traditional,
62.
Gutzlaff, quoted, 205. '*

Haekel, quoted, 182.
IIall, Newman, quoted, 154.
Helios, meaning of, 80.
IIelmlwltz, quoted, 7, 40.
Ilerakleitos, quoted, 58.
Heredity, meaning of, 14 sq.
Herodotus, quoted, 58.
Herschel, Sir John, quoted, 74 sq.
IIerzen, quoted, 4.
Ilillebrand, quoted, 9.
IIipparchus, a Greek astronomer,
19.
Hobbes, referred to, 3, 32.
IIolwell, quoted, 102.
Homer, quoted, 71, 79; condemned
by Plato, 59; his soul hanging
in Hades on a tree, 58.
Hottentot fables quoted, 85 sq.
[fuel, quoted, 99.

INDIANS of Nicaragua, quotation

from a compendium of the the-
olog-y of, 70.
Individualism, what? 4.
Individuality, principle of, suffer-
. ing more now than before, 11.
Italian, present number of speak-
ing, 137; future numbcr of
speaking, 138.

Jacolliott, quoted and criticised,
123 sq.
Japan converted to Buddhism, le-
gcnd about, 213.
Jehovah, nallle of, found in Chi-
ncse literature, 131, 132.
Jones, Sit.. W., quotcd, 100, 101
sq., 107 SqM
- Eduard, quoted, 144 sq.
Josephus, quoted, 116 sq.
Jovis dies, 120.
Julien, St., quoted, 132.
Jupiter, the name, no mere acci-
dent, 90 sq.; the thunderer, 120.
Justin Martyr, quoted, 117.

KARl\IAN, meaning of, 15 sq.
K nowlcdge, dead, dang-erous, 28.
J{û-fa-Ian, works ascribed to him,
194.
n:ukai, founder of a sect in Japan,
214.

LANGUAGE and thought insepa-
rable, 67; its influence on
thought, 79.
Lapland, legend of, quoted, 88.
Latin names for the days of the
week, 118.

MARS, the god of war, 121.
:AJe;kl
jolm, quoted, 147.
lIercurÏi dies, 119, 121.
:A1 etrodorus, quoted, 56.
}.1ill, J. S., quotcd, 1, 12, 21 ; his

INDEX.

245

plea for liberty decried, 4,
without reason, 5; his election
to Parliamcnt a triumph, 6.
lIJilligan, quo-ted, 76.
1I101ltucci, quoted, 130.
1\losaic account of creation found
among the Tahitians, 111.
J\lül]er's, 1\1., rejoinder to Prof.
Blackie, 91 sq.
l\fythology, meaning" of, 55, 64
sq., 66; interest of, in our days,
53; religion of the Greeks, 61 ;
now as there was in time o.f
Homer, 65; pervades the sphere
of religion and of thought, 69 ;
philosophy of, lecture on, 53 sq.

NAMES to be submitted to very
careful snuffing, 37.
Nihilism, defined, 4 ; dangers of, 5.
Nirvana, definition of, 16.
Nominalism, higher, or Science
of Language, 37.

ODIN, 120, 121, 122.
Old-Norse names for the days of
the week, 118.
Omniscicnce to be avoided, 47.
Oriental tongue, now spoken in
Europe, 16 sq.
Over - examinations, complaints
against, 46.

PARADISE. See Sukhavati.
Phoibos, meaning of, 81; and
Daphne, story of, 81 sq.
Phonetic alphabet, table of, 150;
reading according to, 151 sq.
Pioneer (an Illdian paper), quoted, 1:
113.
Planets, their names, 118; m:cd
for the names of the days of the
week, 116.
Plato, quoted, 59 sq., 79.

246

Population, table of supposed
number of years required for
doubling the, in different coun-
tries, 138.
Portuguese, number of speaking,
137.
Power and Responsibility of Eng-
lish Universities, 10.
Psyche, mea.ning of, 69, 72.
Public opinion, 11, 12.

R.ELIGIO
S, division of, 62.
Re11lllsat quoted, 131.
H.ussian, number of speaking, 138 ;
society described, 4.

SABBATH mentioned by Roman
and Greek writers, 117 sq.
Sanskrit names for the days of the
week, 118.
- i\ISS., materials on which they
were written, 206 sq.; searched
for in China, 203 sq.; in Japan,
210; texts discovered in Japan,
181 sq.; translated by Chinese,
189 sq.
Saturni dies, 116 sq., 121.
Scandinavian mythology and
Buddhism, connection betwecn,
113 sq., 122.
Schools in England and on the Con-
tinent, shortcomings of, 25 sq.
Self-government, dangers of, 10.
Semiphonotopy, name for a style
of spelling, 141; reading ac-
cording to, 191 sq.
Sextus Empiriclls, quoted, 58.
Snow, namc for, 77.
Society, human, secret of, 13.
Sokrates, quoteù, 56.
Sokratic method, 24.
Spanish, present number of Rpeak-
ing, 137; future number of
f'peaking, 138.

INDEX.

Species and Genus, meaning of,
32 sq.
Spelling, reform of, 133 sq., 135
sq.; favorite subject with Ro-
man scholars, 140.
StaltZ, quoted, 69.
SUl'ton, quoted, 116.
Sukhavati-vyûha, a title of a
Buddhist Sutra, 214; list of
MSS. of, now extant, 216 sq. ;
translation of, 220 !'q.
Sukhavati, or Paradise, descrihed,
223 sq.
Sun, sign or name for, 75 sq., 78.
Sunrise, feelings at the, 74.
Swift, Dean, quoted, 134.

T ABLE of the names of the days
qf the week in -
Anglo-Saxon, 118.
English, 118.
French, 118.
German, 119.
- l\Iiddle-High, 119.
- Old-High, 119.
Latin, 118.
Old Norse, 118.
Sanskrit, 118.
Table of the names of the Plan-
ets, 118, 119.
Tacitus, quoted, 12l.
Teachers to be natural examiners,
43.
Testamcnt, the. Old, accounts of,
founù in the literature of the
Brahmans, 100, 106.
- Old and New, foum! in the
Vedas., 123; borrowed from
Brahmans and Buddhists, 101 sq.
Theologr, on false analoglc!' 111
comparative, 98 sq.
Tltirlwall, Bishop, quoted, 143.
Thought and language insepa
raLle, 67.

Thor, 120.
Thunar, I
O.
Thursday, 120.
Tiu, 120.
Tocqueville, De, referred to, 12.
T7.ench, quoted, 169 sq.
TyZor, E. B., quoted, 70.

UNIFORl\IITY, danger of, 12 sq.
Universities, English and Ger-
man, compared, 7 sq.; differ-
ences between, 9 sq.; guardians
of freedom of thought, 28; me-
diæval and modern, home of
free thought, 51.

V AKSH, Sanskrit word for to
grow, like the English to wax,
17.
Veneris dies, 120.
Vid, Sanskrit word for to know,
like the Engli8h to wit, 17.

INDEX.

247

Vir.qil quoted, 71.
Vosisus, S. J., quoted, 99.

WEEK, names of the seven days
of the, received from the names
of the planets, 116.
Weeks and week-days, system of
counting, first introduced in
Egypt, 118.
JVilfurd, quoted, ] 06.
lVilson, quoted, 188.
Wodan, day of, 120, 121.
Wunsch or 'Vish, name of Wuo-
tan, 121.
Wuotan, 120.

Xenoplzanes, on Homer and He-
siod, 57 sq.

Zeus Kronïon, mcaning of, 80,
121.
Ziu, 121.

!t
,, ::I..,
, I '

\
\

MULLER, FRIEDRICH
LAX

Chips from a
Ger!na.T' workshop.

.
(j
....
=E
.
y.

PJ
27
.M73
1890 ·
vo1.5

....

")
.;.".,;,

-';.,l,

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Texts

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Chips from a German workshop Volume 5"

See other formats